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
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
Active or Passive Obedience but Christ hath performed it in his very Righteousness when he was in his state of Humiliation what was done was done then the Effects were afterwards in his Exaltation Arg. 4. That which is pleaded in Prayer by us for Forgiveness and ought to be is Imputed to us but the very Righteousness of Christ is pleaded by us this is the sake of Christ for which we ask of God pardon of Sin we have nothing to do to plead that Righteousness which is not accounted to us There 's none of us pleads our own Righteousness but the very Righteousness of Christ Arg. 5. That Righteousness upon which a Sinner hath peace with God is the Righteousness reckoned to us for Justification but Christs very Righteousness is that by which we have peace with God Eph. 2.13 15. and Peace of Conscience Heb. 9.14 c. 1. beg Rev. 1.5 Arg. 6. Christ could not be said to be Jehovah our Righteousness if his very Righteousness were not Imputed to us but only the Effects Jer. 23.6 And upon what is it grounded that the Church is named as it is in Chap. 33.16 but upon Christ's Imputed Righteousness Arg. 7. I might add that Argument which others have urged that as the Sin of the first Adam was Imputed to his Seed so the Righteousness of the second to his Seed See Rom. 5. But it 's easie to prove the Sin of Adam was Imputed to all his Posterity he being a publick Person and all we in his Loins if Mr. Neonomian deny this we will go upon the proof of it another time It behoveth him to bear the Punishment and Wrath of God not for his own Person but for our Persons and so making a happy Change with us he took upon him our sinful Person and gave unto us his Innocent and Victorious Person wherewith we being now cloathed are freed from the Curse of the Law Luth. on Gal. 3.14 Christ's Mediation was a Redeeming Mediation he must give himself for a Ransom or Counterprize 1. The price is a standing price that the Law requires without the least Variation or Abatement 2. There must be an Exchange betwixt the Mediator and us he must be a Counterpane standing in our room or stead 1 Tim. 2.6 3. There must be an Exchange of Person for Person which is the surest Exchange in War or Captivity when nothing but one Person will be taken in the room of another no Gifts or Rewards could unbind the Infinite Justice of God 1 Tim. 2.6 Tit. 2.14.4 There must not only be Person for Person but like for like 1. In Nature one of an Inferiour or Superiour Nature would not do Heb. 2.16 Phil. 2.7 2. There must be an Exchange of State for State Phil. 2.7 2 Cor. 8.9 Isa 53. 3 4. Mat. 20.28 Gal. 3.13 Mr. Stone of New Eng. Neonom You seem to speak as if Christ's Holiness were Imputed to us and that we are perfectly Holy Antinom You know I told you it may follow from your Doctrine viz. Imputation of Sanctification as well as Justifying Righteousness because Sanctification is an Effect and Vertue of Christ's Mediation I shall now speak but a word to this Point viz. That our Life of Sanctification is in Christ we are sanctified in Christ Jesus and he is made of God to us Sanctification As we are Created in him so we live in him as to Holiness and we have a compleatness of Sanctification in him and though that fulness of Sanctification is not properly said to be communicated by Imputation as by derivation of Grace yet this Infused Grace arising into Duty and our Duties mingled with much Corruption must be covered by the Imputed Righteousness of Christ that they may be accepted as well as our Persons Dr. Horton on Rom. 8.3 understands the Law of the Spirit of Life that is in Christ to be all that Holiness wherewith the living and quickning Spirit of God hath filled the Humane Nature of Jesus Christ which is the fulness of Sanctification in all Grace and Holiness Neonom Though Christ be perfectly holy yet his Holiness is not so imputed to us as that we are perfectly holy p. 46. You say we appear before God perfect in Holiness p. 428. Antinom You seem to imply as if Christ's Holiness were ours by Imputation so much as it is ours and therefore you insinuate as if there were such a thing as partial Imputation But we speak not any thing either of Christ's Holiness as so Sanctification by way of Imputation but of real Communication from him to us of which perfect Fulness we do receive by the new Creation in him and Grace received from him as Members from the Head in our measures by vertue of our mystical Union to him 2. I said Let me tell you if God had not laid the Iniquities of Men on Christ Dr. Cr. p. 428. there 's never a Soul had entred into Heaven For there 's no Refuge to fly to there 's no hope of drawing near to the everlasting Kingdom of Blessedness till the Lord Jesus cleanse you thoroughly from all Sinfulness and Filthiness and so you appear before God perfect in Holiness It is his white Rayment makes us worthy to walk with the Lamb in White he counsels the Church of Laodicea to buy of him White Rayment Now see now we are abused by you The Words you refer your Proof to doth relate to and is intended of the state of Glory that the Saints must be personally and perfectly holy before they can draw near to God in that full Fruition of him in the state of Blessedness in Heaven If there is any thing understood of the Saints Perfection in this Life it is not denyed but that their Graces and Duties are imperfect here as they come from and are acted by them and are mingled with much Sin and Pollution but their acceptation with God must be in a way of Perfection 1. In that Christ of whom we are Members and who is made unto us Sanctification as the Head of the Body the Roâ— and Fountain is perfect in Sanctification and we in him Col. 1.19 ch 2.10 2. That all the best Duties and Services as coming from us and performed by us being mingled with Sin and Corruption must be accepted in and through Christ and covered in his righteousness so that as they are presented unto God by our Advocate they come before him washed white in the Blood of the Lamb and persumed in his Incense Neonom God cannot account a sincere Christian perfectly holy The Vnion in Marriage doth not transferr habitual Qualifications from Husband to Wife Is a foolish Wife perfectly wise because her Husband is so It 's absurd Our restored Holiness is through the Operations of the Spirit and not by transfusion If the very Holiness of Christ's Persons be in us if increated then we are God's if created Holiness of Christ's Humane Nature be in us it must depart from him and cease to be in
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
I will name no more of them for the present Antinom The Assembly is full on this Point that our Union to Christ is before the Act of Faith Shorter Catechism Q. 29. How are we made Partakers of the Redemption purchased by Christ A. By the Effectual Application of it to us by his Holy Spirit Q. 30. How doth the Spirit apply to us the Redemption purchased by Christ A. By working Faith in us and thereby uniting us to Christ in our Effectual Calling The Spirit first comes as a Bond of Union and works Faith to Unite by its Act in the first Union by the Spirit we are passive made new Creatures new Born receive Spiritual Life In the second we are Active put forth lively Acts and lay hold on Jesus Christ and all Gospel Grace And if the Confessions say we are United to Christ by his Spirit and by Faith as you acknowledge then there is a Union by the Spirit which is effective of that which is by Faith You say my mistake is in thinking all Grace is wrought by Christ as an Actual Head you mean Grace comes not at first from Christ as our Head but as a designed Head therefore you find fault with my founding our Union on Christ as our Head Where I say P. 104. Christ is the Head of his Church i. e. the Fountain of all Spiritual Sense and Motion A Man cannot have Spiritual Eyes of Faith unless he have this Spiritual Head c. I am not alone here for Mr. Norton and others make Christ as our Head the Fountain and Spring of all Spiritual Life and Motion Evan. P. 249. The Person of Christ Mediator is the first Saving Gift actually applyed to any Elect Person The motion of the Spirit upon the Soul is from Christ the Head See p. 250. DEBATE XII Of Justification by Faith Neonom VVE having formerly discussed the Doctrine of Justifying Righteousness I desire we may now enquire into the Nature of Justification by Faith for Mr. Antinomian hath this Errour among the rest That the whole use of Faith in Justification is only to manifest that we were Justified before and Faith is no way necessary to bring a Sinner into a Justified State nor at all useful to that end D. W. p. 103. Antinom I must hear your proof Sir before I enter upon my defence Neonom You put this Objection Is not believing required unto the Justification of the ungodly Answ An ungodly Person after he is Justified doth believe but you will say it is an Act of Christ by Faith Answ Then Christ doth not Justifie alone c. Nay I say more Christ doth Justifie a Person before he doth believe c. He cannot believe that which is not but he is first Justified before he believes then he believes he is Justified Dr. C. p. 85. Antinom My words were these An ungodly Person after he is Justified doth believe But you must understand it it is not the Faith of the Person that doth simply and properly Justifie but it is that Christ in whom he doth believe he believeth on him that Justifieth the ungodly It is he that Justifieth that is Christ It is not believing that justifieth mark well that Phrase he that justifieth Justification is an Act of Christ not an Act of Faith How often is it said it 's God that Justifieth Justification is an Act of God and not of ours Faith is an Act of ours it 's God by his Grace efficiently Justifies and imputeth the Righteousness of Christ we are materially and objectively Justified by the Righteousness of Christ and by that alone and this I say is before a Sinner believes efficiently because the Object must be before the Act of the Recipient Organ A Man sees because there is Light to see which illuminates the Organ especially such a Light as takes off a privation of sight and restores the Habit so that Justification in regard of Application must be before believing the first Application in ordine naturae saltem is to an ungodly Man eo nomine that he may believe who is thereby made to believe that he may be Justifyed for in Justification we are both Passive and Active as Maccovius saith Calvin Mr. Norton Norton p. 214. hath this Objection If we are Justified by Faith then Faith is in order before Justification and consequently the Act is before the Object whereas on the contrary the Act depends on the Object and not the Object on the Act to this Effect Bellarmine Answ 1. We distinguish between the Being of Justification and our being Justified i. e. between Justification as taken in an Abstract Sence viz. without the receiving Subject thereof viz. a Believer and a Justification taken in a Concrete Sence i. e. together with the Believer Justification considered in the Actstract Sence taken simply and in it self which signifieth Remission of Sins and Righteousness to Acceptation prepared for though not yet conferred upon the Elect hath before Faith a Being not only in the purpose of God but also in the Covenant between the Father and Mediator and in the purchase of Christ This Truth held forth in the Gospel makes the Object of Faith and thus the Object is before the Act. The Grounds of this distinction or distinguishing between Justification actually procured and actually applyed Justification was in God's Decree before Faith P. 315 316. before Sin yea from all Eternity Gal. 3.8 Rom 3.25 The Actual procuring of Justification as considered in it self gives a Being to Justifying Faith Justification is compared to a Garment our being Justified to a Garment put on Justification of the Elect is absolutely and actually procured for them by Christ's Satisfaction before Faith Col. 2.14 The Hand writing of Ordinances cannot be limited to the Ceremonial Law only because it had respect unto the Gentiles then Living to whom the Ceremonial Law belonged not God hath declared his Acceptation of Christ So Calvin on the place P. 216. whereby he hath actually procured Justification for the Elect before Faith It is no small part of the Ministry of Reconciliation That God Imputed unto Christ the Sins of the World of the Elect before they did believe and will not impute them unto the Elect 2 Cor. 5.18 19. This great Gospel Truth is of special use to beget Justifying Faith in the Heart of a Sinner The same the Apostle confirms concerning their Reconciliation Rom. 5.10 That it was wrought for them when they were Enemies i. e. Unbelievers Here is a Twofold Reconciliation mentioned one at the Death of Christ before Paul or the Romans some of them at least were Believers the other at Conversion The first Reconciliation though it was vertually wrought before by the Lamb slain in God's Appointment and Acceptance togethr with his own consent from the beginning of the World Rev. 13.8 yet it was not Actually wrought until the Death of Christ for this Satisfaction sake God Imputes not Sin unto the Redeemed for he
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
Answer And would it be so absurd to say a Believer may be discharged before the Death of Christ were not the Faithful under the Old Testament discharged before the Death of Christ We say when the Charge of Sin is taken off from one and laid upon another there is a discharge real in one sence or another Generaliter but not particulariter here is a blotting out of Sin quoad Deum though not quoad Conscientiam Christ took away Sin by way of Suretiship before he did it Actually and so the Faithful before his Coming were saved Neonom If this Errour hold the Gospel Notion of Forgiveness by the Blood of Christ is destroyed D. W. p. 19. Antinom You mean I suppose if this be Truth No It confirms Gospel Forgiveness by the Blood of Christ but prove that it destroys it Neonom Forgiveness denotes a Person guilty it is a Judicial Act of God as Rector Acting by a Gospel Rule Antinom The Apostle saith He justifies by free Grace through the Redemption of Christ that he may appear just also in so doing because his Justice is satisfied He shews God justifies sitting on a Throne of Grace Grace is the Impulsive Cause so far as it consists in the Pardon of a Sinner but it is through the Righteousness of Christ to shew forth his Righteousness and in forgiving in and through the Righteousness of Christ he hath the high concurrence of Justice therein that as he is a Gracious Justifier so he is justified as Righteous by doing it in this way and whereas you say It 's a Judicial Act of God Acting by a Gospel Rule I think you should rather say It is a Gracious Act of God Acting according to the Rules of Justice therein for so the Apostle clearly describes it Rom. 3.24 25. And methinks you turn my Stomach to hear you give so pitiful a low and mean Title to God as a Rector as if he were but a Mayor of a Corporation or some little Earthly Prince Neonom And this supposeth the full and perfect Atonement made by Christ and the Grant made in Vertue thereof Antinom What have we been Disputing about all this while I am glad to see Mr. Neonomian's Ingenuity that now he grants all we Dispute about only differs in naming a thing you say the Atonement of the Wrath of God by Christ for Sinners which is in my sence Fundamentally and Really Pardon quoad Deum is full compleat and perfect and that Forgiveness supposeth it and the Grant made in the Vertue thereof if you had said it had been the Grant made in the vertue thereof I take it you had spoken your own sence fuller than to say it supposeth the Grant made in the vertue thereof unless you mean the Grant made to Christ as our Representative which comes more to our sence but let these Mistakes in Expression pass You seem to distinguish between a Discharge and a Discharge so do we you distinguish between an accepted Atonement for us and giving out the Grant and Patent to us and so do we between Impetration and Application and so do we between Forgiveness in foro Dei and Forgiveness in foro Conscientiae or Evangelii but as to that first I find you do not Love to call it Forgiveness though you think it carries the Nature of Forgiveness in it why should you represent me as such an Heretick to scare People from my Ministry upon the meer naming a thing by a word which by your own terms contain the Nature and Substance Neonom But Forgiveness supposeth a Person Guilty Antinom Christ's bearing Sin supposeth all the World is become Guilty before God and the Elect as well as others and therefore he became a Propitiation for Sin to God that we who are by Nature under the Law and thereby Condemned as Children of Adam and in our own Consciences and thereby guilty might receive Forgiveness of Sins or an Atonement both signifying the same thing by believing A Man is reus quoad Deum reus quoad Ministrationem Legis in Conscientiâ and in this sence shut up under the Law till Faith comes and then is his Personal and Particular Discharge through the Blood of Christ and this last I apprehend to be the Justification by Faith which the Apostle Paul speaks so frequently of neither do I say that this or that Man hath any part in Christ or Pardon any more than in Election and Redemption till he doth believe Neonom But you are of Opinion a Person is never guilty Antinom I never had any such Opinion if you distinguish right concerning Guilt Neonom You say Man that Sins were laid on Christ before we were Born and therefore never upon us Antinom How old are you Was not Christ's Death and Suffering almost 1700 years ago And do you not say Sins were laid then on Christ and if they were then laid on Christ they cannot return to us in the sence as they were taken off from us and therefore they are never upon us in the same manner as they are on those that are not Elect and this must be in respect of Guilt quodamodo some kind of guilt distinguish then of guilt there is guilt in respect of the Righteous Judgment of God in foro Dei and guilt that accompanies the Letter of the Law setting in with our Consciences and in that sence the Law worketh Wrath. Sins were laid upon Christ and they lye upon us but not both in the same Manner nor for the same End Neonom A Judicial Act by a Rule there is none Antinom What your new terms of Art mean I will not trouble my self my Scheme as you term it of Justification imports that God graciously pardons in a way of Manifestation of his Justice and all God's Acts are according to the Rule of his good Pleasure and Will and that 's enough Neonom For the Gospel Grant of Pardon is not to the Elect as Elect but as penitent Believers neither is the Atonement of Christ supposed to our Forgiveness Antinom Pardon as to the Nature of it belongs to Sinners as such eo nomine Faith and Penitency is given together with Remission of Sins and how can you have the Face to say I do not suppose Atonement in Forgiveness or belonging to it when it 's upon that account that you have fell so foully upon me because you think I lay too great a stress on Atonement and give too much to it in Forgiveness Neonom You own the laying of our Sins on Christ before the making of Atonement and without our Sins lay on Christ he could not justly be punished Antinom And do not you own that it's first in Nature to making Atonement and how could Christ be justly punished without he had the Merit upon him either by his own Sins or by the Sins of others but I find you own a Man may be justly punished that deserves it in no sence whatever Neonom So that our Discharge being a
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
And is it not strange Gentlemen that after he had said this he should affirm a Separation Antinom And is it not strange that you cannot distinguish between Separations I may separate from a thing in one respect and not in another I may separate from another as to Communion but not as to Relation let it be Son Wife Brother c. and it 's strange you cannot understand forsaking to be but of a Relation Neonom The Lord Jesus could not be abhorred or odious to God for in him God was always well-pleased Isa 42.1 Matth. 17.5 Antinom We say the same Christ's Person in his Eternal Sonship was so All the Indignation that was testified towards him in his Humane Nature in which only he was capable of Suffering in that he became a Curse as well as Sin God saith it Neonom Mr. Calvin How horrid a Sound hath it to the Ear to say that Christ is odious to God and abhorred by the Father Calvin Methinks those new Words applyed to Christ do not sound so well and some Ears are offended at them I think it 's better to use the Scripture-Expressions Christ made Sin and Christ made a Curse for us Let us but have the thing Mr. Neonomian we will part with any Word that 's not Scriptural if you give us another that will express it as well Antinom Doth not this make as horrid a Sound in a Christian Ear that God manifested his wrathful Indignation against sin in the Person of Christ in a most awful and dreadful manner Calvin But that 's his way of expressing it he doth not like yours Antinom Then I will abdicate those Words Odious and Abhorrence and use his Words I be not fond of mine Neonom 5. Christ could not be separated from God or abhorred while his Body lay in the Grave his Soul went into Paradise Antinom No his Hypostatical Union was not dissolved nor God's Fatherly Love removed from his Person but yet at the same time he was under the Suffering of Death which was Penal for sin he finished his Soul-sufferings on the Cross but was under the Separation of Body and Soul which was part of the Threatned Indignation against Sin as also the lying of his Body in the Grave Neonom I will shew you your mistakes You do not distinguish between the Affection of Wrath and Effects of Wrath because God forsook Christ as to the usual Degrees of Comfort he thinks Christ was separated from God Antinom Sure this is a soul Mistake if he should mistake his Logick as to take the Cause to be the Effect and the Effect the Cause But I doubt you mistake your Divinity as to ascribe an affection of Wrath to God But I pray where there 's an Effect of Wrath in the Creature is not Wrath the Cause of it He that lies under the Effects of Wrath is he not under Wrath If Christ suffereth the Effects of Wrath he suffereth Wrath. I know not how any one should suffer Wrath any other way As to my Thoughts about Separation from God they are only your Imposition of Thoughts and Meanings upon me as I have told you Neonom Because he that is formally a Sinner is odious to God therefore he thinks Christ was odious to God who had on him the Punishment of Sin with the Guilt or Obligation to bear Punishment by his own Consent neither of which have any thing of the Loathsomness of Sin Antinom I will not use the Word Odious because you love not the smell of it I say therefore because a formal Sinner or Committer of sin unpardoned is the Object of God's threatned Indignation bearing the Effects of Wrath therefore an imputed Sinner is also the Object of God's threatned Indignation bearing the Effects of Wrath. You will be at the old Socinian Notion still That Christ bore but the Punishment for Sin and Guilt is only Obligation to Punishment which is absolutely false unless you mean reatus culpae for nothing is a Demerit of Punishment but reatus culpae Neonom I know not why you think Christ came not near God from the time of his Death to his Resurrection unless because of your Conceit for the Loathsomness of Sin God could not bear the sight of him Antinom Your frequent Banter and Scoffs at the Scripture-Account of the Nature of Christ's Satisfaction and of Sin I am sure is very odious and a horrid Sound to a Christian Ear. I shall not think such reasoning worthy of any thing but a Note of Contempt Calvin Mr. Neonomian you must know we can't part with this Article of our Faith That Christ was made a Curse for us no more than that That he was made Sin That Christ bore the Curse of the Law and was made a Curse for us is such a Gospel-Truth that we need no other Authority for it than what is contained in the Scripture being so expresly declared which all sound Protestants always understood of bearing the Wrath of God in his Soul and Body especially in his Soul undergoing Poena Damni and Sensus the first whereof I look to be the greatest and Cause of the other and also fully enough express'd by our Lord Jesus Christ upon the Cross Take Mr. Calvin in his Harmony on the Evangelists Altho' there appeared more than Humane Courage in Christ's Outcry yet it 's certain it was uttered from Extremity of Grief Verily this was his chiefest Conflict and more grievous than all his other Torments because that in his Anguishes he was not so refreshed with his Fathers Holy Favour that he did in some respect perceive him alienated from him for neither did he offer his Body only as the Price of our Reconciliation with God but in his Soul he bore the Punishment due to us and they are Men of unsavoury Spirits that slighting this part of Redemption do insist only on the external Punishments of the Flesh for as Christ satisfied for us so it was requisite that he should be set as guilty before God's Tribunal For nothing is more horrible than to perceive God as a Judge whose Wrath exceeds all Deaths Neither doth he complain Feignedly or Theatrically that he was deserted of God according to the insipid Cavils of some For the inward Grief of his Soul from the Depth of Anguish compelled him to break forth into this Outcry He did perfectly fulfill the Law endured most grievous Torments immediately in his Soul Conf. Assemb c. 8. § 4. He bore the Weight of God's Wrath and laid down his Life an Offering for sin Large Catceh p. 249. Quest What Death did Christ suffer when he Sacrificed himself Mr. Perkin's Catech. Answ A Death upon the Cross peculiar to himself alone For besides the Separation of Body and Soul he felt also the Pangs of Hell in that the whole Wrath of God due to the Sin of Man was poured forth upon him The Apostle doth not say that Christ was cursed but a Curse Calv. on Gal. 3.13 which is more for
great Confidence take up the sense and words of these Men. Neonom But Dr. Owen saith That Imputation is not the Transmission or Transfusion of the Righteousness of another into them that are justified that they should become perfectly and inherently righteous thereby c. p. 242. D. W. p. 51. Antinom We say so too but Dr. Owen doth not say We are justify'd by the Imputation of the Effects of Christ's Righteousness he opposeth that Imputation as a Socinian Notion Neonom He doth not For he saith That the Righteousness of Christ is imputed to us as to it's Effects hath this sound Sence namely The Effects of it are made ours by reason of that Imputation It is imputed so reckoned unto us of God as that he really communicates all the Effects of it unto us Antinom But what immediately follows in the next Sentence Dr. O. p. 243. Why did you not quote all the Dr. said Is not this base false dealing You would only quote as much as should serve your turn But to say the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed unto us only its Effects are so is really to overthrow all Imputation For as we shall see the effects of the Righteousness of Christ can't be said properly to be imputed to us and if his Righteousness it self be not so Imputation hath no place herein nor can it be understood why the Apostle should so frequently assert it as he doth Rom. 4. Therefore the Socinians who do expresly oppose the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ and plead for a Participation of it's Effects and Benefits only do wisely deny any such kind of Righteousness of Christ i. e. of Satisfaction and Merit as alone may be imputed to us Here 's matter of Fact to shew your double-dealing Neonom But the Assembly is of my mind Q. 69. What is the Communion in Grace which the Members of the Invisible Church have with Christ A. In their partaking of the Vertue of his Mediation in their Justification Adoption Sanctification and whatever in this Life manifests their Vnion with him so that in their Judgment it 's the vertue of Christ's Mediation operates on us and not the Mediatorial Righteousness in us Antinom This is strange Language to talk of Imputing the Mediation of Christ to us and this is that you now plainly tell us is the Mediatorial Righteousness that you mean all along or that partaking of the Vertues of Mediation and Imputation are convertible Terms Those Reverend Divines do not say the Mediation of Christ was imputed to us no more than his Kingship Priestship Prophetical Office yet we are in a Sence made Kings Priests and Prophets but not by Imputation They tell you only of the Effects of his Mediation of which Justification is one If you would have told us what they say of Imputed Righteousness you should have rehearst the next Q. 70. What is Justification A. Justification is an Act of God's Free Grace unto Sinners in which he pardoneth all their Sins accepteth and accounteth their Persons righteous in his sight not for any thing wrought in them or done by them but only for the perfect Obedience and full Satisfaction of Christ by God imputed to them and received by Faith alone See the Shorter Catechism Q. 33. See also the Confession directly condemning all your Scheme of Divinity at once C. 9. Of Justification Those whom God effectually calleth he also freely justifyeth not by infusing Righteousness into them but by pardoning their Sins and by accounting and accepting their Persons as righteous not for any thing wrought in them or done by them but for Christ's sake alone not by imputing Faith it self the Act of believing nor any other Evangelical Obedience to them as their Rigteousness but by imputing the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ unto them they receiving and resting on him and his Righteousness by Faith The Savoy Conf. ch 11. is the same verbatim Now Gentlemen I appeal to all Men of Sence and Honesty whether Mr. Neonomian hath dealt fairly thus to represent the Judgment of Dr. Owen and the Reverend Divines of the Assembly or thus to impose upon the weak and such as have not Will or Leisure to search into the Truth of what he saith Neonom I tell you what the Savoy says which is the same Articles with the Assemblies Antinom But you tell us or would have us to understand that the meaning of the Assembly about Imputation is that the Vertue of Christ's Mediation i. e. in your declared Sence the Effects only operates upon us and then after rehearsal of the Words of the Savoy you add Thou seest it 's Christ's Righteousness is imputed for Pardon and not infused You 'll oppose imputation to Infusion which none of us plead for But this Imputation is in your Sence only as to the Effect which you would have us to believe is the Judgment of Dr. Owen and the two Assemblies And I find you lamely rehearse the Article of your Confession as being ashamed to behold your Erroneous Doctrine so fully condemned by them Do not think such pitiful little Sophisms as these are such as do become a professed Minister of the Gospel or that your Reverend Vouchers have not prejudiced their Honour by asserting so publickly to the World That in all material things you have fully and rightly stated the Truths and Errors in this Treatise and look upon this as a Work of considerable Service to the Church of Christ c. when your manifest Design is to hide Truth by Equivocations false Representations and odious forced Consequences and to impose old palpable decried Errours Veritas non querit angulos Now Sir that you may see we have more than Authority for this great Doctrine of Imputation of Christ's very Righteousness 1. I prove that to say Christ's Righteousness is imputed only as to Effects is to deny the Doctrine of Imputation Consider from the Nature of Imputation it self Imputation is the reckoning and esteeming that unto one man which is done by another As in case of Debt or Wrong done by one Man to another a third comes and does or promiseth that thing whereby the Offended Person becomes satisfied with the Offender previous to which Satisfaction in Nature is his reckoning the Payment made or to be made unto the Offender it 's not the taking of this or that Payment in any kind that is Satisfactory for the Offender unless it be by the offended Person reckoned to him Paul to Philemon v. 18. gives the clear Notion of Imputation both as to Wrong and Righteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If he hath criminally or unrighteously done thee wrong in filching or stealing impute this to me or put it upon my Account Take me as Paymaster and put my Payment on his Account i. e. In respect of any wrong that he hath done thee or Debt that he owes thee Here 's my hand for it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will repay it to thee Now Paul
former manner i. e. not between parties bearing a proportion to one another and therefore one bound in Duty or Relation to be subjected to the Will and Pleasure of the other Antecedently or fallen under the Breach of their Duty and Relative Obligation and so lying at his Mercy and such are the Covenants that are made between Parents and Children under Age Masters and Servants while in Service between Soveraign Princes in Actual Dominion and their Subjects Of these Covenants there are two sorts 1. A Covenant by way of Legislation or a Law Covenant And 2. A Covenant by way of Promise or free Obligation without Condition required to Entitle to the Promise the Spirit of God calls the first of these a Law and it 's properly so and the second a Covenant of Promise 6. A Law Covenant 1. Presupposeth these two things 1. Foedus minimè hic intelligitur reciprocum aut equale jus contrahendi propter partium inaequalitatem cum altera sit Deus altera homo creatura non est humani sed divini hujus foederis institutio dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Legislatio Clopenberg de Foed Vet. A Soveraign Legislative Power duly lodged in the Law-giver or else his Law Covenant is but Vsurpation 2. A Power and Ability in the Subject to perform the Conditions his Law requireth or else the said Law is Vnreasonable Vnjust and Tyrannical 2dly It implies 1. That both the Condition and Sanction be at the will and pleasure of the said Soveraign Law-giver 2. That the first and natural end of the Law is Obedience to the preceptive part which Obedience is due first by a Relative Politick or Natural Relation of the Subject to the Legislator so antecedaneous to the Law and secondarily to that particular Law Obligation 3dly Consequently to this Obedience whether it be little or more there is an Entitling to the remunerative part of the Law if any expressed or implied and by vertue of the compact is a Reward and the said Obedience though infinitely disproportionable is meritorious But in case of Transgression the Sanction by way of Penalty takes place and is called the Wages of Sin such a Covenant as this was the Covenant of Works and it 's not to be supposed that this Law Covenant was grievous to Adam having a Concreated Perfection both of Ability to perform it and an absolute Delight in the whole revealed Mind and Will of God from the highest Principle of Love to God with all his Heart and Soul neither could his Obedience be without unwavering stedfast Faith wherein when he began to stagger his Fall began 7. Adam stood under this Law Covenant as under a Covenant of Works wherein he is to be considered and the Law it self 1. He himself under these Considerations 1. As Endowed with a Personal Perfection and lying under a particular obligation to Obedience both previous to and directly by that Law with Sanction which the Soveraign Creator brought him under 2. God brought not him only as a single private Person under this Obligation only but as a publick common Person the Head of all Mankind and he was not only the Covenant Representative but the Natural Fountain the whole Nature being in his Loins and therefore that first Covenant Breach of his threw the whole Nature out of Covenant the Law charging Transgression upon the whole Humane Nature and laying it under the sentence of Death Rom. 5. Hence his Sin is justly Imputed to all his Posterity the whole World becoming guilty before God besides that a Corrupted Nature which is propagated to all his Posterity 2dly The Law it self 1. The particular Command or rather Prohibition that Adam stood under had these things in it 1. It was but a small Branch of that Moral Obedience which God expected from him and put him upon tryal by but his breaking thereof in one point made him guilty of all God shewing thereby unto him and the World that no Condition could be accepted but perfect Obedience 2. He was not required to work out unto himself any further Grace than he had freely received but to persist in that and therefore the Duty incumbent upon him was perseverance in Grace 3. The particular Obedience required of him for his probation was very easie and small next to nothing negative and but with-holding his Hand from an Apple and bore no proportion as a Condition to the Promise of Eternal Life and therefore could never have merited in respect of the Value but would have been Meritorious by reason of Law compact 3. If he had persevered it must have been by Grace as his Ability was of Grace and so it is with the Angels that stand they have nothing but what they have received and therefore they are saved by Grace in a Covenant of Works 8. The Law by reason of the Fall of Man and God's Will to restore him by a Saviour is not Vacated and Abolished but remains the same still in the commanding Part and Sanction It requires Moral Obedience of Man as God's Creature and continues to condemn Man for the first Sin and all Sins derived from it both Original and Actual in Unregenerate and Regenerate the preceptive parts of it are Rules of Obedience to Redeemed Ones and the Sanction remains even to them in Christ Jesus the Law obtaining its compleat end as to Righteousness Active and Passive in the second Adam Besides this the Law that God governs the World by and will Judge it by at the last Day the Works of Wicked Men will be Condemned and their Persons for their Works the Saints shall be also Justified by their Works because their Persons and their Works are perfect in Christ Jesus they being in him shall be found perfect before God and there is no Condemnation belonging to them nor Sin to be laid unto their Charge Of a Covenant of Promise THere is a Covenant by way of free unconditional Obligation and that is where the Principal or Supream Covenanter binds himself to the Covenantee absolutely requiring no condition to be performed by the Covenantee before his performance of the Promise and in a sence this Covenant is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not as a Covenant with the Stones of the Field that abide uncapable Subjects of Restipulation but it supposeth the Covenanters to be such as are by the Promise made capable and willing to restipulate and perform all Duties for matter and manner that may answer the design of the Covenant consequential to the bestowing of Promise in which their Obedience is contained 2. That God hath Covenanted thus with the Creature without requiring previous Conditions to the Performance of the Promise is not to be questioned such was that made with Noah Gen. 9.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LXXII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will i. e. alone and by my self set up and establish my Covenant with you without calling you forth to restipulate or perform Conditions and the Promise was that all Flesh
contains not the Genus or common Nature of a Covenant viz. to be an Agreement wherein two Parties do mutually consent nor the Parties wherein the Nature of a Covenant doth consist which is a Condition and Promise nor is there a Covenant in the more improper fence denoted viz. A Promise for if it be a Covenant of Grace it must be at least a Covenant of Promise 2. You say it 's a way ordained of God Here 's no Forma or Differentia for many things are ways and means which are not Covenants you should have said according to your Sence it's God's Agreement with Sinners upon Terms of Faith and Repentance 3. The Application of the means effectually is part of the Salvation it self 4. You say this Salvation is prepared by Christ you should have said By the Father in his Councel and Purpose for the giving his Son and blessing us with all Blessings in him The Life and Salvation is Christ and in Christ he is our Life the Father hath given us Life and this is in his Son 5. You should have said Which he hath promised to enable the Elect to comply with or else it hath nothing of a Covenant in it it carries only the force of electing Will and if he hath promised then to some or other either to Christ and then it brings in your Covenant of Redemption if to any other excluding Christ then to the Elect out of Christ For the Promise to make a Person comply must be made and must be in Nature before he doth comply Neonom I pray what do you say is the Covenant of Grace Antinom I shall tell you the Parties between whom it was made It was made by God in the Person of the Father with Man in the Person of the Son You speak improperly to talk of the Father and Spirit covenanting with the Son you should rather say The Father Son and Spirit covenanted with the Son For by this Notion you take in the Persons of the Trinity for you must take them all in the covenanting part and then there 's as much reason to take them in all in their stipitulating part because the Son is God and so the three Persons covenanted with themselves under the same distinct consideration in the Godhead But we say God essentially considered covenanted in the Person of the Father with Man in the Person of the Son His Son taking Man's part being his Representative as having his Nature in the same Person therefore as the Second Adam having all the Spiritual Seed in his Loyns and as a common Person foederally Neonom And what is a Covenant between these â—aâ—â—sks Antinom It 's the Promise of Eternal Life made to Christ and to the Elect in him to be performed in and through Jesus Christ as the great Condition to all them that shall be saved by him Covenants are denominated from either part by a Synechdoche here chiefly from the Promise as the same is sometimes from the Condition The Covenant of Grace is a great Mystery c. Rom. 16.25 Col. 1.26 1. Because it was Eternal Tit. 1.2 2 Tim. 1.9 2. That though between God and Man yet being made with us in Christ it was between Equals Phil. 2.6 3. That though it was a Covenant of Works yet a Covenant of Grace to Christ a Covenant of Works and most conditional Isa 53.10 11 12. To us absolute and free being a Promise of the Gift of Christ and all Blessings in him 4. It is mysterious in respect of the several states that it hath had 1. Hidden 2. Revealed Hidden in God before the World was Revealed since the World 1. Less manifested in the Promulgation before Christ's coming 1 In respect of the few Emanations and Discoveries of its Brightness and Lustre in Absolute Promises to Adam Noah Abraham Jacob David 2 In regard of it's Vailed state First Under the Veils of Sacrifices Types Figures Secondly Under a Legal Moral and Conditional Administration 5. It is mysterious in regard of the various Names and Titles that it hath had from it's different Dispensations that under the Law was called Old and Faulty because it made but a partial Discovery of it's Glory and Lustre In the New Testament it 's called the New Covenant in respect of the new and clear Dispensation it 's called the Promise because it appears absolutely given forth in a Promissory way it 's called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Nature of it in relation to Sinners it's good News to them It 's called a Testament because confirmed by Christ's Death Neonom But you tell me not how you prove the Covenant of Grace and Redemption are all one Antinom 1. Because I know them not spoken of any where as distinct Covenants The Scripture of Isa 53.10 11 12. is a place wherein this Covenant is so clearly described between the Father and the Son it holds forth the Covenant of Grace fully and clearly the Promise of all Grace and Benefits that are contained in the said Covenant of Grace And the Apostle tells us expresly That this Covenant-Agreement was the Will by which we are sanctified through the offering of the Body of Jesus once for all Heb. 10.8 9 10. 2. That Covenant that contains in it the whole Matter and Form in Conditions and Promises of the Covenant of Grace doth not Essentially differ from it but the Covenant of Redemption doth It contains Conditions and Promises of Grace all things that pertain to Life and Godliness and it contains in it all conditions upon which we may be partakers of any Promises Christ's Person Offices Sacrifice Righteousness Active and Passive there 's no Covenant condition of Atonement Propitiation Satisfaction unto the Justice of God but it is here Christ is the Great Fulfiller of the Law and Satisfier of it he is the End of the Law for Righteousness to every Believer Rom. 10.4 3. From the Vailed Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace before the coming of Christ their Sacrifices and their Ceremonial Administration held forth in a Figure that it is made to Christ and confirmed in him as the Great Offering and Atonement Christ is there exemplified and set forth as the fulness of the Covenant of Grace both in respect of Promises and Conditions 4. When we plead any thing of the Covenant of Grace it 's the Promises of Life made to us in Christ as Yea and Amen to us in him in respect of obtaining and performance to us 5. Our Justifying Acts of Faith is fixed on Christ as the Summ of the Covenant of Grace as Satisfying for our Sins and as to whom the Promises were made and the great thing promised as the Fountain and Meritorious Cause of all Blessings he is given us as the Covenant 6. There is all Grace to be had in this Covenant frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora there is no Grace but is given forth and
to reach the End of the Covenant which I utterly deny for that would destroy it's own Nature and Use and also the Covenant of Grace it self Neonom The Question is not whether Assurance be attainable in this Life as an effect of Faith D. W. p. 74. Antinom A Perswasion of Truth and certainty thereof is Assurance and so far as I do believe there is this in the Act of Faith though a weak Faith hath Doubtings attending but not therefore commendable And there can be no Faith without some degree of Perswasion concerning the Truth of the Object You speak here of an Assurance which must be reckoned of the highest Degree of Perswasion and therefore you deal not fairly to change your Terms from Perswasion to Assurance There is a two-fold Assurance the Plerophory of Faith and an Assurance that I have true Faith which is Spiritual Sence and Argumentation from it's Nature and Effects one is by the proper direct Act of believing the other by reflex Acts of the Soul upon it self Neonom Nor whether a Sinner ought to apply yea doth personally apply the general Offers of Christ and Life by his own Compliance with the Terms of the Gospel for upon a true acceptance of a whole Christ he is mine in vertue of the Gospel-promise which God will perform in giving Christ and Life to all that accept him as he is proposed for our acceptance Antinom You are very dark and obscure in what you here speak 1. By Personal Application I understand particular Application and so it 's your Sense that a Sinner ought to make a particular Application of the general Offers of Christ and Life in the very Act of believing and so far I joyn with you and that his thus believing is his Compliance the Gospel's Work being perswading my Compliance is to be perswaded and there 's nothing else expected which you call Terms the Terms is that we put in no Terms but accepting Christ freely offered And you say he is yours in vertue of the Gospel-Promise you must intend in the vertue of the Gospel-Promise believed or else you have no right but as you had before believing an Intentional Right only if it be a claimable Right it 's in a Promise believed for whatever Right is real in the Promise none will plead any but what he believes And it is in vertue of the Promise to give Christ and Life to many that do not yet accept of him For it 's the vertue of the Promise to give Life to dead Sinners that they may actively and comfortably receive and accept him Neonom Nor whether a convinced Sinner hath a more special Regard at first of the Priestly Offices and Sufferings as what are more sensibly fitted to his guilty state Antinom I understand not what you mean by Priestly Offices as if Christ had more Priestly Offices than one Christ doth exercise his Priestly Office in the state of Humiliation and Exaltation but I have not seen any before that ascribes to Christ two Priestly Offices And if you mean Justifying Faith it 's Office is to lay hold on and apply the Person of Christ in his Priestly Office Neonom Nor whether every thing recorded in Scripture must be dwelt on with the same regard concern and assurance as the Essentials of the Covenant of Life Antinom You mean here Faith as to the general Nature of it you do not distinguish it from Faith in the Justifying Nature all along Neonom Nor whether Faith contain in it a reliance on Christ as our only Saviour and on his Satisfaction and Merits as what alone purchased our Pardon and Acceptance as well as it includes the realizing Assent to the Truth and unfeigned fiducial Consent to acceptance of a whole Christ in all his Offices All these I affirm Antinom You acknowledge then that Faith contains in it 1. A Reliance on Christ as an only Saviour How can this be without some perswasion A rational Man never rests and leans upon a thing that he hath not some ground of Perswasion that it 's strong enough to bear him 2. You own it includes a realizing Assent to the Truth and this is a very high Perswasion of a Truth with a particular Application of it to a Man's self as belonging to him 3. You say there 's an unfeigned Fiducial Consent to and Acceptance of Christ and all his Offices This is strong Confidence when the Soul is so far perswaded of the reality of the Tender of Christ made in the Promise that he doth not only take him but with boldness questions not but he hath the Son and hath Life in this very Act of Believing You say we rely on Christ's Satisfaction and Merits as what alone purchased our Pardon and Acceptance This is true in a true Sence but we easily see what you mean by what you speak before Neonom The real difference is whether the whole Essence of Saving Faith consists in an inward Perswasion or Assurance that our Sins are pardoned and Christ is ours This you affirm and I deny Yea I deny that it is at all of the Essence of Saving Faith D. W. p. 75. Antinom What I said and you charge for my Errour I stand to it and have made it appear to be Truth I said the whole Essence of Faith is the Eccho of the Heart answering the Voice of the Spirit and Word of Grace and thereby it 's the Obedience of Faith The Soul believes and closeth with Truth according to the nature of it and in such a manner as is required You wrong me to say I used the Words Perswasion or Assurance I said If you receive Truth and in reality believe it and rely upon it you may conclude that Christ is yours and this is now a Conclusion made upon my believing too I pray would you not say so to a poor Sinner If thou dost believe on the Lord Jesus with all thy Heart thou shalt be saved and you ought to conclude you shall be saved And this is a perswasion of my state upon believing Calvin Mr. Neonom It 's indeed a marvellous thing that you should say and unsay a thing in the same Breath to own Faith a reliance on Christ that it carries a realizing Assent to the Truth and an unseigned Fiducial Consent and now to say Perswasion is not at all of the Essence of Faith Neonom I said it contained and it included it I said not they were of the Essence Antinom This is just like your wonted way of Dodging How doth Faith contain and include these things As in a Box which contains and includes things of a Specifick Nature different from it self Well we will attend your Proof Neonom The second thing in difference is Whether Saving Faith includes not in it's Nature that powerful efficacious Assent to the Word and fiducial consenting to acceptance of Christ as Prophet Priest and King with a Reliance on his Merits and obediential Regards to God as the
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
cannot Impute Sin to Christ and the Elect both yea he accepteth us in the Beloved Eph. 1.6 Loving the Persons of the Elect Rom 11.28 though hating their Sins and also their State under the Curse of the Law Rom. 6.14 Chap. 7.6 Eph. 2.3 The second is wrought at our Conversion when the Enmity of Nature is slain by the Infusion of Grace Neonom You ask But what doth Faith serve for D. W. p. 103. Dr. C. p. 85. You answer It serves for the manifestation of that Justification which Christ put upon a Person by himself alone Antinom Adding that he by believing on him may have a declaration and manifestation of his Justification Faith is the Evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 A Man is Justified and that by Christ alone but it is nâ—t known to him it is an unseen thing Well how shall he see this The Text saith Faith is the Evidence by Faith we apprehend it and rejoice in it as we apprehend it to be our own I tell you in another Discourse Whatever the Scripture speaks concerning Faith Justiâ—ying Dr. C. p. 596. it must of necessity be understood objectively or declaratively one of these two ways either Faith is said to be our Righteousness in respect of Christ only who is believed on and so it is not the Righteousness of its own Act of Believing Or else you must understand it declaratively i. e. Whereas all our Righteousness and all our Discharge from Sin flowing only from the Righteousness of Christ alone is an hidden thing that which in it self is hid to Men doth become evident by believing and as Faith doth make the Righteousness of Christ evident to a Believer so it 's said to justifie by it's own Act declaratively and no otherwise Neonom He saith We do not believe that we may be Justified but because we are Justified Antinom Yes we do believe that we may be justified declaratively I say there Tho' Faith it self cannot be called our Righteousness Dr. C. p. 86. yet in respect of the Glory that God ascribes to it that it seals to Men's Souls the fulness of Righteousness how can you consider a Person a believing Person and withall an ungodly Person When Persons are Believers they cease to be ungodly but if Men be not justified till they do believe Christ doth not justify the ungodly but rather we must believe on him that justifies the righteous But as I said we do not believe that we may be justifyed but we do believe and truly believe when we are and because we are Justified So that still it stands firm we are not justified we are not in Covenant we partake not in the Covenant by any Condition we perform till which Performance the Covenant cannot be made good unto us but we are in Covenant and Christ makes us to be in Covenant for his own sake without any Condition in the Creature God will have mercy on whom he will without any-thing in the Creature to partake first Neonom He saith God doth add never a tittle of Pardon it self more to him that is a Believer than to that Person not yet converted to the Faith c. D. W. p. 104. Antinom He still gives you but part of my Sence and Misrepresents it my words were these Beloved Dr. C. p. 578. for my own part I cannot conceive any other considerable difference between the plea of Christ for a Converted Person and the unconverted Elect but this Circumstantial difference namely that the value of his Blood is of equal force to Believers and Unbelievers being Elected saving that the Believers have this priviledge that the Lord Christ pleads for the Manifestation of this discharge unto this Converted Person but pleads not for the present Manifestation thereof unto the Unconverted Elect Person till such time as he shall be called to the Faith and by that Faith that thing be made evident which before was hid Now follows what he would blacken me with I say the Pardon of Sin by the Blood of Christ is as full for the Unconverted Elect Person as fully passed over in Grant to that Person as to the Believer himself God doth add never a Title of Pardon it self more to him that is a Believer than to that Person not yet Converted to the Faith in regard of the substance of the Pardon it self and this I clear as a great Truth if any will give themselves the trouble of reading it which I stand to Neonom He saith Faith as it takes hold on Christ's Righteousness it doth not bring this Righteousness of Christ to the Soul but doth only declare the presence of that Righteousness that was there even before Faith was and there denies Faith to be so much as an Instrumental cause of our Justification Dr. C. p. 597. Antinom I added That I did abhor to walk in the Clouds in a Truth of so high Concernment as you too much do Sir and that I knew I had many very catching Ears about me such as you are I said That Faith as it lays hold upon the Righteousness of Christ c. as he hath told you and the reason of that saying I gave in as plain words That there is no Person under Heaven Reconciled unto God Justified by God through the Righteousness of Christ but this Person is Justified and Rconciled unto God before he doth believe and therefore Faith is not the Instrument Radically to unite Christ and the Soul together but rather is the Fruit which follows and flows from Christ the Root being united before-hand to the Persons that do believe Shew me how any Person ununited to Christ can believe and how any one that is unjustified can be actually united to Christ as he must needs be before he can believe Neonom He tells you that Justification is from Eternity in several places Antinom You know that to be a false charge for I have told you a Man cannot be said to be Justified before he hath a Being I have often enough told you in what Sence I apprehend Justification to be before Faith but deny noâ— the Justification by Faith spoken of by the Apostles in the true Sence of it according to my best understanding I have told you that Justification is first in its provision is fully procured and provided and it 's first in Grant Gift and Application applyed unto us before we make Application of it by an Act of Faith whereby we do not bring it into the Heart but the Grace of God doth which we see behold and improve there by Faith manifesting and declaring our Justified Estate whereby our Consciences are freed from Guilt and Condemnation hence I call it Justification in Conscience in foro Conscientiae Mr. Rutherford Rutherford Exc. 1. c. 2. who wrote against the Antinomians saith There is a Justification in the Mind of God Eternal and a Justification in time terminated in the Conscience of a Believer Norton p. 315. That Justification
is Actually and Absolutely procured for the Elect before Faith and shall infallibly be applyed to them all in time seemeth to reach the Scope intended by the Godly Learned whose Spirits have more particularly laboured to hold forth the whole Truth in this precious part of Soul-Reconciling Doctrine and Soul-Supporting Mystery of the Gospel To say That we are Justified by vertue of a singular Promise in the Court of Conscience and in our own Persons in which sence the Scripture constantly saith We are Justified by Faith is not that I know of affirmed by any And for this he quotes Chamier Cham. Tom. 3. lib. 12 13. Sect. 18. Nobis persuasissinum est remissa esse peccata antequam Credidimus We are verily perswaded that our Sins are forgiven before we believe for we deny that Infants do believe And Perkins Perkins on Gal. 3.16 who saith Christ is first Justified i. e. Acquit of our Sins and we Justified in him And Dr. Ames saith The Transaction between God and Christ was a certain previous application of Redemption and our discharge unto our Suâ—ety Ames Medul lib. 1. c. 24. § 3. and unto us in him which to that secondary Application to be performed in us hath the respect of a kind of Efficacious pattern so that that the Application to him is the Representation of this Application to us and this is produced by vertue of that And he saith § 3. Hence our discharge liberatio nostra from Sin and Death was not only established in God's Decree but also in Christ and granted and communicated to us in him before it could be perceived by us Rom. 5.10 11. Hence the Father and the Son are said to send the Spirit to the performing of this Application John 14.16 and 16.7 And in the Chapter of Justification Am. Med. c. 27. §. 9. He tells us what the sentence of Justification is 1. It was in the Mind of God as it were conceived by him by his Decree of Justifying Gal. 3.8 2. It was in the Christ our Head pronounced when he rose from the Dead 2 Cor. 5.19 3. Virtually pronounced in that first relation which ariseth from Faith ingenerated in the Heart Rom. 8.1 4. Expresly pronounced by the Spirit witnessing with our Spirits our Reconciliation with God Rom. 5.5 Hence it appears that the Doctrine of our Justification before Faith is not an Errour but a Great and Glorious Truth and it is no prejudice to the Doctrine of Justification by Faith but the Foundation Ground and Reason of it neither is it any Door opened to Licentiousness an unbeliever having no more Confirmation or Encouragement to persist in Sin thereby than by the Doctrine of Election which gives none but as Mr. Norton saith It 's no small part of the Ministry of Reconciliation that God Imputed to Christ the Sins of the Elect before they did believe and will never Impute them unto the Elect. Neither is my speaking of Faith's taking hold of Christ's Righteousness and saying That it brings not Christ's Righteousness to us but presupposeth it given and granted such an absurdity as you would make it For Dr. Ames saith very distinctly Justifying Faith precedes Justification it self as a cause of its Effect but Faith apprehending Justification necessarily presupposeth and follows Justification as the Aâ—â— doth the Object about which it is Conversant and this I take to be the true Notion of Justification That Great Man for Holiness and Learning Chamier saith I deny that Faith is the cause of our Justification for then our Justification would not be of Grace Cham. Parstrat Tom. 3. l. 13. c. 10. Sect. 18. but of our selves but Faith is said to justifie not because it effecteth Justification but because it is effected in the Justified Person and in another place he saith Faith doth neither merit obtain or begin our Justification Lib. 22. c. 12. Sect. 5. and Sect. 9. for if it did then Faith should go before Justification both in nature and time which may in no wise be granted for Faith it self is a part of Sanctification now there is no Sanctification but after Justification which really and in its own nature is before it I think Sir I have cleared my self sufficiently from the Charge of Errour in this Point viz. That our Justification is in being before Faith And now Sir before we proceed to the other part of your Charge concerning the manner of Faith's Justifying let us hear your Arguments against Justification in any sense going before Faith Neonom One Real Difference between us is Whether we are Justified before we believe Which I deny for 1. We are Justified by Faith is the common Language of the Holy Ghost Rom. 5.1 Gal. 2.16 D. W. p. 105. Antinom We own it and say too that we are Justified by Faith and this doth not prejudice but confirm what we assert Neon Faith is enjoyned as an effectual means of Justification by Christ Antinom We deny not that Faith required in the Gospel and wrought by the Spirit is as an effectual means of Application of Justification but therefore it follows not that it 's in being before That which is not in being cannot be applyed Neonom The Gospel denounceth and declareth all condemned till they do believe Antinom The Gospel declares only their state of Condemnation under the Law the Gospel properly condemns not and we own that every one by nature is a Child of Wrath and in the sense of the Law is a condemned Person and every one is shut up under the Law as the Apostle saith till Faith comes his New-Covenant Blessedness belonging to him is not yet made manifest nor is his Nature and State changed Neonom Vnbelief is the Cause why men are barred from Justification and remain obnoxious to Misery Antinom It is God that justifies and no Sin can barr God's Act of free Mercy in pardon of a Sinner in the Pardon of Unbelief as well as of other Sins when God will justifie It 's very absurd to say Sin barrs God's Act of Pardon It 's true Unbelief influenceth a Sinner as to his own Acts and will be charged upon him as his Fault and will aggravate that Condemnation which he hath under the Law because from his own corrupt Will and Affection he will not receive Pardon and Life that is offered in the General and Indefinite Tender thereof made in the Gospel And therefore Christ saith John 5.40 Ye will not come to me that you may have Life Heb. 3.18 19. They could not enter by reason of unbelief Unbelief on our part doth keep us from Christ but hinders not on God's part that effectually draws all the Elect justifying of them and working Faith in them Rom. 8.29 30. Eph. 1. The whole Unregenerate state is a Barr till God break it by Regeneration which is a free Work of Grace as Justification is an Act of Grace and must be found where-ever a Sinner is Justifyed by Faith and that in
order thereunto Neonom The other Question in difference between us is Whether the Vse of Faith in Justification be only to manifest our Justification which we personally had before This you affirm and I deny And add That Faith justifies by receiving Christ and therein answers the Ordination of God who hath promised to justifie the Believer by application of Christ's Righteousness in this gracious effect of it upon a guilty Soul D. W. p. 105. Antinom You alter the Terms of my Expression to make for your own turn My Words were these Quest What doth Faith serve for Dr. C. p. 85. Answ It serves for the manifestation of that Justification which Christ puts upon a Person by himself alone that you by believing on him may have the Declaration and Manifestation of your Justification And I say That it is not the Condition without which we receive no benefit from Christ but rather a manifestation thereof My Words are not That the use of Faith is only a manifestation but I say Rather a manifestation of Benefits received than a condition of receiving benefits And I say it is a Declaration and Manifestation And what is the Promise in the hand of Faith but a Declaration of the Grace of God in Justification of a Sinner and thereby a manifestation of it unto the Conscience Whereby Justification comes to be in foro Conscientiae For I say Where the Condemnation of a Sinner is by the Law there the Absolution of the Sinner is by the Gospel but Condemnation of a Sinner is in Conscience by the Law therefore there his Absolution is by the Gospel and that 's by a Gospel-Sentence pronounced and believed which Sentence is God's Declaration and Faith sealing to the Truth of it applies it and is the Eccho of the said Declaration in the Soul And you say Faith justifies as receiving Christ and you say well Christ is received in the believing of the Gospel-Declaration The Declaration in the Gospel is Life by Christ See 1 John 2.25 This is the Promise that he hath promised us evrn eternal Life 1 John 5.11 And this is the record that God hath given to us eternal life and this life is in his Son and this is the witness of God which he hath testifi'd of his Son Ver. 10. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself It should be Testimony 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This very believing is a Testimony of the Truth of the Promise and his part in it as by the latter part of the 10th Verse appears He that believeth not makes God a Liar and as the truth of the Promise concerns himself ver 12. He that hath the Son hath Life this believing he saith is having the Son as declared in the Promise and Record that takes in the Declaration believingly And this is apprehending and applying and relying on the Promise and Christ in it both as Truth and Goodness Believing is our modus recipiendi or manner of receiving and we do believe that we may receive and apprehend him unto Justification You add and say first Faith justifies by receiving of Christ but you say it 's Application of Christ's Righteousness as to gracious Effects you mean only You do not deal above-board you are not for the application of Christ's Righteousness it self imputed to us and put on by us in believing We have noted your Error in this kind already you 'll not have Christ's Righteousness imputed to us for our Righteousness according to all the Language of the Scripture but only the Effects given us as effectual Calling Sanctification and Glorification So that the Righteousness of Christ justifies no otherwise than it sanctifies and glorifies for it doth these as Effects But I pray express your self more clearly how Faith Justifies or what part Faith hath in Justification according to your Sense without so much ambiguity Neonom The difference is not Whether Faith or any other Grace be a Jot of the meriting Righteousness for which we are justified D.W. p. 104. Antinom But it is whether Faith or any other Grace be a qualifying Condition for Justification if it be so let me alone to prove it a meriting Righteousness whether you call it so or no. Neonom Nor whether Faith or any Grace add any thing to the vaine of Christ's Merits These I deny D. W. p. 104. Antinom No wonder for you have rated Christ's Merits S. Clara dicit omnes convenire scientium de causa efficicate meritorià Justificationis efficiens est Deus meritoria Christus solum ergo controversitur de formuli De Justif Peccatoris how much their Value shall be Valeant quantum valere possunt But there are other things quasi merita at least that must give right to the Benefits procured by Christ's Merits which you call your subordinate Righteousness Neonom Yea I add that if Christ's Righteousness could be applyed for Pardon to the vilest Sinner before he believes it would justifie him but God hath declared that it shall not be applied to Vnbelievers Antinom That 's not for God hath declared the contrary that he justifies the ungodly and if Justification as God's Act be not applied to us first before we are Believers there would never be any Believers for Justification is the cause of Sanctification and not Vice versa But Justification by Faith i. e. Justification as applied by a sensible gracious Act of ours is after Sanctification and we must distinguish in Application of Righteousness between Gods Acts and ours for God must apply Grace before we can partake of it Neonom Nor whether we are Justified the same Moment as we truely believe in Christ and the Blessing is not suspended for any time longer This I affirm because God justifies us by the Promise as his Instrument and this Promise declares that he will justifie him that believes Antinom You 'll own then that we shall not stay for the Benefit if we perform the Condition God will pay ready Mony but the Qualification must be first in us by Nature But why I pray Is it not manners at least to give God the Honour of being first in this Work and say We believe in that moment we are justified 2. I find now you will not have Faith to be the Instrument of Justification but have found out another whereas you find fault with me that I will not have Faith the Instrumental Cause of Justification in its being no more than a passive receiving Instrument and you 'll have the Promise to be the Instrument declaring Justification and what can Faith do but receive this Declaration and thereby declare to the Conscience of the Sinner what the Gospel-Instrument declares Neonom Nor whether an Elect Person once justified by Christ shall be kept by Christ's Care in a justified state Antinom You do not suppose then that Justification is certainly durable in it's one Nature that it is an everlasting Righteousness but that it is loosable
say he means not this Hurt in respect of the Nature of Sin and if so it must be in respect of the real pernicious Effects of Sin for a Believer sees Hurt in Sin and complains of it but as to its Nature which is odious in itself or to its Effects 2. It appears that you judge his meaning is such because you say that by his Doctrin of Christ beaâ—ing Sin he makes Sin innocent to the Elect Whereby 1. You make the nocency of Sin to lye in the punishment of it and thereby justifie Dr. Crisp's Expression how unproper soever it be or erroneous 2. You say totidem verbis that Penal Effects of Sin are most of the hurt that comes by it according to what Doctrin we have already charged you with supra The great sign of the truth of Grace that is usually given is the fear and hatred of Sin from the very nature of it its contrariety to God and his Law and that its the greatest sign of an Hypocrite to abstain from it only for fear of Wrath and Hell And 3. You tell us upon what Principles he goes 1. That God hath no Sin to charge upon an Elect Person tho' a Man sins God reckons not his Sin to him c. Whereby you shew where your grudge is it 's against the Doctrin of Imputation more than against the Doctor for any thing he hath said As for your Instance about poisoned Wine you say yourself he speaks not by way of Exhortation but Doctrinally therefore exhorts none to take poisoned Wine but cautions them against it again and again and as for any that have through weakness and inadvertency he tells them their Antidote as the Apostle John 1st Epist c. 2. 1. My little children these things I write unto you that you sin not and if any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is a propitiation for our sins DEBATE XVIII Of God's Displeasure for Sin in the Afflictions of his People Neonom THE next great Antinomian Errour is That none of the Afflictions of Believers have in them the least of God's displeasure against their Persons for their Sins D. W. p. 190 191. Antinom We must proceed in our ordinary Method let us know what you ground your Charge upon Neonom He affirmeth p. 15. Except God will be offended when there is no cause to be offended he will not be offended with Believers because he doth not find the Sin of a Believer to be his own Sin but the Sin of Christ Antinom But he in the next words quotes places of Scripture to prove what he saith He hath made him Sin for us he hath laid upon him the Iniquities of us all the Blood of Jâ—sus Christ cleanseth us from all Sin he bare our Sins in his Body c. and from these he Argues thus If he bear our Sins he must bear the displeasure for them and he did bear the Indignation of the Lord and if so he did bear it all or but part If he did not bear all the Indignation of the Lord then he doth not save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him as Heb. 4. I say not to the uttermost because here is some Indignation and Displeasure left behind and for lack of taking this Indignation upon himself it lights and falls upon Believers So that either you must say Christ is an imperfect Saviour having left some scattering of Wrath behind that will fall on the head of a Believer Or else you will say he is a perfect Saviour and takes away all God's displeasure then there remains none of it upon the person of a Believer Now why had you not Answered his Argument for what he said yea why had you not brought in the next Objection made to clear up his meaning but quote only so much as may leave your Reader under Prejudice Object Yet you will say Is not God displeased and offended at the Sins of Believers when they do commit them Hath Christ taken away the offence of Sin by his Death Answ No therefore do not mistake your self there may be easily a mistake for lack of serious pondering the words I speak I have not said God is not offended with the Sins a Believer doth commit but that God stands not offended with the Persons of Believers for the Sins committed by them he hath that everlasting Indignation against Sin as ever And as there is the same contrariety in Sin against his nature so there is the same contrariety in God's nature unto Sin All contrarieties have a mutual contrariety against each other as Water and Fire c. As Sin is contrary to the nature of God so there is an Abhorrency of God to that Sinfulness here see with what ground you could say that Dr. C. makes Sin Innocent but there is no Offence of God to the Person that commits that Sin because the Offence of God for that Sin hath spent it self upon the Person of Christ there remains none of it to light upon the person of a Believer Christ having born all this Offence for Sin Tho' in our Natures and in the Sinfulness of them there is matter of displeasure yet in Christ for all this God is well pleased with us And yet there is none of God's Indignation against Sin lost in all this for he is satisfied for this his Offence in his Son more than in our own Persons Neonom And he saith p. 18. But are not the Afflictions for their Sins Antinom Come I will tell you he Answers that Objection He saith I Answer No Afflictions are unto Believers fâ—om Sin but not for Sin What is the meaning of that will you say This God in Afflicting Believers doth not intend to punish them as now laying on them the desert of their Sin for that is laid upon Christ but he doth Afflict them in part to be a help to preserve them from Sin I say all Afflictions to Believers are to keep them from Sin rather than Punishment unto them for Sin Neonom P. 170. He saith That at that Instant when God brings Afflictions upon them he doth not remember any Sins of theirs they are not in his Thoughts Antinom That which he Asserts is from plain Texts of Scripture how dare you Banter and Expose so great a Truth as this it is in that great place Jer. 31.33 declared to be the great promise of the Gospel by the Spirit of God Heb. 10.16 17. God saith He remembers our Sins no more you say he doth who are we to believe God or you Neonom He saith Christ being Chastened for our our Sins there 's nothing but Peace belongs to us P. 170. Antinom The Words were thus I see the Scripture runs wholy in this strain and is so full in nothing as in this that he hath generally discharged the Sins of Believers Oh then take heed of falling into the Errour of the Papists that say that God hath taken
displeasure Neonom I will tell you the Doctor 's mistake Because God laid our Sins on Christ to make Attonement for forgiveness of the Elect therefore God cannot be offended with the Elect for them before they repent Antinom Your Mistakes are wilful and foul ones too or else you would not act so dishonestly 1. This Doctrin of laying Sin on Christ you are always bantering take heed it prove not of dangerous consequence to you 2. Hath the Doctor spoken one word of the unconverted Elect in this matter or of the Elect before they repent But your spleen is moved because he founds the security of Believers from the Wrath of God towards them for Sin upon Christ bearing Sin and making full satisfaction for it you cannot brook it that Christ's Righteousness should have this honour I will tell you one thing If you have no better security from Wrath than the Evangelical Righteousness you shew in this Book I can say without a Spirit of Prophecy The Wrath of God abides on you Neonom Because God doth not hate the Believer as an unreconciled God when he sins therefore he is not at all displeased with him because of the Gospel-sins Antinom Because God manifests displeasure against the Sins of his People therefore say you God is displeased with their Persons that 's your mistake it 's not in the nature of God to love and hate the same Object neither hath God such affections as we have If God hate not as an unreconciled God he can do nothing towards that person but what are the effects of love there 's few earthly Parents can correct a Child but it 's in their mind wholly to do them good and to free them of some ill habit or corruption the Child calls the Father's carriage Anger and it looks so to him in a wise Father but all this while his Heart earns toward the Child and longs to be Kissing it Neonom He thinks because a Refiner is not angry with his Gold therefore a Holy God is not angry with Rational Offenders Antinom The Persons of true Believers are precious and honourabâ—e in the sight of God 10000 times more than Gold can be and securer from the anger of God than any Gold can be from the Refiner's anger I suppose your Rational Offenders are your Abominable Believers Neonom Because God will not hate a Believer so as to damn him therefore he cannot be angry with his People so as fatherly to chastize them Antinom If God cannot hate a Believer so as to damn him then he cannot punish or afflict him in this World with the same affection wherewith he doth damn any one but all that befalls him in this World proceeds from the same affection of love that saves them from damnation as to God there 's the same cause of the afflictions and chastisements of Believers as there is of their glorification they all proceed from his Eternal and Unchangeable Love from the sure Mercies of the Covenant of Promise and therefore are all in a way of benefit and advantage towards them God loves a Child of his as much in its infancy and nonage as in its grown state tho' his carriage is different the diversity of state requiring it And as to Fatherly Chastisement if you understand it aright we deny not but such are those of God's Children but you must know the Spirit of God Heb. 12. tells us the comparison will not hold but as a small illustration of it for God's thoughts affections designs are not as Man 's a Father may correct a Child in anger and passion and so for his pleasure as the Apostle saith but God never doth so a Woman may lay aside natural affections and forget her sucking Babe yea murder it but as God cannot lay aside his innate love so he cannot forget to exercise it in all things Neonom Because God afflicts from Sin therefore he doth not afflict for Sin Antinom If you mean from Sin and for Sin in the same sense that Sin is a reason of affliction in some sense or other we deny it not but if you mean it be a judicial cause of affliction as it is in a wicked Man we utterly deny it for such must be attoning to the Law transgressed in part or in whole the Law designs not the salvation of the sinner in any of its executions but it s own satisfaction in his destruction it looks not at his amendment but ruin And therefore if you mean that God as a Father doth so afflict we deny it for to say so were to make him change to invalidate the satisfaction of Christ and make him worse than an earthly Father Neonom As if he could not rebuke for what is past if he resolve not against their amendment for time to God Antinom God resolves their Amendment and therefore chastiseth and God rebukes their Sins and shews Man that he hath transgressed that Faith be exercised the more lively on the propitiation of Jesus Christ who satisfied God for Sin and that they may the more admire the free and pardoning Love of God and that his dealings are so favourable it 's the Lord's Mercy we are not consumed because his Compassions fail not and that Sin may be made more sinful and hateful to them Neonom The Doctor was led into this Opinion by not considering that Anger and Displeasure be not Passions in God but a Will of Correcting and are denominated from the kinds and degrees of Correction Antinom Quite contrary he took up his Opinion because he believed they were not so and that God's correcting his Children is from his Love and Good-will and that whatever the Degrees are the Specifick Nature is toto genere distinct from Punishments in anger Calv. 1. There is no reason why God should exact the Debt of Sin in the suffering of Believers because Christ hath fully satisfied his Father's Justice for their Sins 2. Their Sorrows and Afflictions cannot carry a Curse in them and therefore not the Wrath and Displeasure of God for he hath born their Sorrows and carried their Grief not that they should not have Sorrow but that their Sorrows should have nothing of the Sting of Sin the Curse of the Law in them 3. They are under the Grace of Adoption therefore Chastening is the Fruit of Adopting-love Heb. 12.6 And it 's one of the good things God hath allotted to them as Children and that for many great Ends 1. To be Partakers more and more of his Holiness in general Ver. 10. for their Profit and Advantage 2. To be conformed unto Christ therein who learned Obedience by suffering Heb. 5.8 3. To fill up that which is behind of the Afflictions of Christ in his Mystical Body Col. 1.24 4. That we may have fellowship with Christ in his Sufferings and therein be conformable to his Death Phil. 3.10 5. That as the Sufferings of Christ abound in us so our Consolations may abound by Christ 2 Cor. 1.5 6.
this Society the Overseers of my Will with this Proviso That if Mr. Neonomian do refuse or do not well and truly execute this my last Will and Testament in the agreed Judgment of this Society that then the whole Trust shall devolve upon the said Society which I doubt not but they will endeavour faithfully to perform Calv. Mr. Neonom Will you accept of this Executorship Neonom I do not know what Power he hath to dispose of the Goods of other Men I take it to be great presumption in him if not dishonesty to dispose of other Mens Proprieties seeing he renounceth them all Antinom Sir I crave your Pardon I must confess Mr. Calvin he hath given me a just Rebuke for when we met in the Eutopian Fields finding me Anonymus he was so courteous as to lend me or rather impose upon me the Name of Mr. Antinomian during my short Converse here he having two Names himself he could lend me one for a little while which as you see for Conversation sake I have made use of with an Intention to return it yea in the mean time did declare and did plead it against all Men that it was Mr. Neonomian's Propriety and therefore I now return it to him accordingly Neonom No no Sir I gave you that Name as your Propriety it best expressing your Opinions Antinom Then Sir you 'l grant I have Power to bequeath it in my last Will and I bequeath it to you Calv. But by your favour Sir it 's a judged Case and therefore you have not Power to bequeath it if you borrowed it it 's Honesty to return it before you depart Neonom What do you mean by a judged Case Calv. I mean that Mr. Neonomian hath before this Society sufficiently given us to understand that his Opinion is that the moral Law is vacated and a new Law brought into the room of it Antinom And more than that there are certain Divines in this City great Friends to this Society that have excepted against his Principles as highly Antinomian Therefore take it as your own by Law Vale. Antinomus Exit Anonymus Calv. Now Sir your great Antagonist is withdrawn I shall deal plainly with you and briefly sum up the Heads of these things wherein it hath manifestly appeared by the foregoing Debates that you have given abundant cause of just offence by your late Writings 1. That you have unjustly charged and misrepresented Dr. Crisp by your self owned to have been a holy Man 2. That you have falsly stated those things which you call Truths and Errors 3. That you have vented your own erroneous Tenents and endeavoured to prove them agreeable to the Articles Confessions and our Orthodox Protestant Writers by perverting their Sense or misapplying what they say when as they are most repugnant to you 1. As to the said Doctor you charge him unjustly with those things which are directly false I shall give an Instance or two of it You say this is one of his Errors chap. 1. that he saith That if the Elect should die before they believe yea when they are under the Dominion of Sin and in the Practice of the grossest Villanies they are as much the Sons of God and justified as the Saints in Glory Whereas he expresly denies the truth of this Charge in his Vindication he makes of himself against some who in his Life-time had reproached his Doctrin and Ministry as you do now p. 637. They say that I should affirm that if an elect Person should die a Whoremonger and Adulterer c. in all kind of Prophaneness he shall be saved He appeals to his Hearers whether ever they heard him Preach any such Doctrin and declares it a gross notorious and groundless Slander And his following words are I said before and say again That there is no elect Person suppose him to be capable and come to years shall die before he is called i. e. before the Lord give Faith to this Person to believe and in some measure frame him to walk by the Spirit according to the Rule of the Gospel The second false Charge is Chap. 2. Err. 2. That he should make Christ the real Blasphemer Murderer c. and that he was so accounted of the Father Whereas he asserts and vindicates the Innocency of Christ's Person he saith only that Christ was accounted a Transgressor from a real Transaction or Imputation of our Sins to him in which Doctrin the Scriptures are most full and express 3. You charge this Error upon him Chap. 10. That Christ is offered to Blasphemers Murderers and the worst of Sinners that they remaining ignorant unconvinced and resolved in their purpose to continue such they may be assured they have a full Interest in Christ and this only by concluding in their own minds upon this offer that Christ is theirs That Christ ought to be offered to the vilest of Sinners and they invited to come unto him is sound Gospel-truth tho' you condemn it for an Error And is it possible a Man of Conscience can slander a Man whom he owneth to be holy with such a notorious Falshood That he should assert that Christ is offered to Men that they remaining ignorant unconvinced and resolved in their purpose to continue such might be assured of their Interest in Christ concluding only in their minds that Christ is theirs this we have proved to be a notorious Slander Many other Falshoods have been proved 2. As for Misrepresentations they run thorow the whole Book 1. Of Dr. C. that you may abuse and expose him 2. Of other noted Writers and Confessions you have horridly misrepresented them to serve your turn in asserting Error and condemning of Truth In misrepresenting Dr. Crisp you have either perverted his meaning and partially rehearsed his Expressions or else condemned what Truth he asserts and defends as great Errors As to the first we have sufficiently made it manifest in some Instances in the first part and it hath abundantly been proved in the whole progress of our Debates And here it is not amiss to add a word or two to what is said to your Error in the sixth Debate that you make a great Cry and Noise about viz. That Dr. C. should say That Christ while he bore Sin and was under the Punishment thereof was the Object of God's abhorrence The Doctor 's words are p. 180. All that hatefulness and loathsomness of Sin is put upon Christ that he stands as it were the abhorred of the Father for a time 1. You leave out as it were 2. You improve this to a hatred of the Person of Christ and a separation of his Natures upon his using the word Separation as Exegetick of forsaking both Scripture Expressions concerning Sin and Christ 3. You hereby manage your design of beating down the Doctrin of Christ's bearing God's Wrath and Curse for us as you do the Doctrin of his bearing Sin 4. As to the word abhorred upon a diligent Enquiry we find it to
the Stomach and that the whole Mass of Blood is infected with ill Humours or the Morbid Constitution of some Parts Out of the abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh saith our Saviour our great Physician Is it not sad when there is a poysonsom Juyce under the Lips and a Mouth full of Bitterness Rom. 3. You first charge the Ministry of some and most hereabout know what sort of Men you mean with being the Cause of Men's Security in Sin And why Because they preach the Doctrine of the Gospel in a free Justification of a Sinner by Faith without the Works of a Law according to the Apostle Paul and preach down your Doctrine of Justification by Works But you express the Effects of this dangerous Doctrine to lie in these things 1. Security in Sin A Doctrine that quickens Men that are dead in Trespasses and Sins one part of which Death is Security in Sin doth not cause Security in Sin But the Doctrine of Free Grace in Justification of a Sinner without Works of any Law doth so Eph. 2. I shall not now enlarge upon you 2. Another ill Effect is you say That it causes the mistaking the Motions of sensible Passions for Conversion This is rather the Effect of your own Doctrine wherein you lay the whole Stress of Justifying and Saving Grace upon Sensible Passions and set Men wholly to judge of their State thereby It 's marvellously to be wondred at that any Man should have the Impudency to charge those Effects upon an opposite Doctrine to his which are the natural and palpable Effects of his own and he sees so to be 3. You charge upon it the general Abatement of an exact and humble walking This Charge is likewise of the same Nature Whereas the Spirit of God hath disclaimed any true Cause of exact walking beside the Grace of God that brings Salvation and then teacheth it as hath been proved As for Humble walking what is a greater Inducement thereto than the Doctrine of Faith which ascribes all to the Gift of Grace empties us of every high Imagination and Thought It exalts Christ and makes him all and in all Whereas yours is the contrary no Doctrine tends more to the lifting up of the Creature than that of Neonomianism next to that of the Papists And no wonder say you when so many affirm such and such things Where are the many or the any that you can charge with saying these things in the same Sence you put upon them Many Expressions that taken together with their Connexion in the explained Sence of him that speaks are not only true but safe and sound but abstracted and wrested may be made to look as black as Hell You may say David saith That there is not an honest Man upon the Face of the Earth Psal 12. That he saith There is no God Psal 14. That Moses affirms God to be a Man Exod. 15.3 And in a Thousand Places in your way and manner it 's easie to charge Blasphemy upon the very Scriptures And how often Lying if Hyperbole's be not allowed to be used without Wrong to the Truth As to the particular Charges I shall speak to each in it's proper place and lay open your Prevarications Errors and false Imputations to the World Neonom In this present Testimony to the Truth of the Gospel I have studyed Plainness Pref. D. W. p. 3. and to that end oft repeated the same things in my Concessions to prevent the Mistakes of the less Intelligent tho' I could not think it fit to insist anew upon all Antinom Your Testimony is against the Truth as shall be made appear and is not to be accounted a Testimony For a Testimony is a credible Witness or Evidence As the Apostle Paul saith Our Testimony among you was believed 2 Thes 1.10 And this Testimony is with a good Conscience 2 Cor. 1.12 And Paul testified the Gospel of the Grace of God Acts 2.24 1. Your Testimony is not to the Gospel of the Grace of God but against it and therefore not materially true 2. Your Testimony is formally naught it being not accompanied with a good Conscience but with a purpose and design to deceive You pretend to do Good but you manifestly design Evil to blast the Honour of God's Free Grace as if it were a Sin-teaching Doctrine and blacken a Holy Servant of Christ who is now in Glory for Preaching the Gospel your Testimony can't be believ'd because of your manifold Prevarications Equivocations and False Teachings in this Treatise of yours And whereas you say you have studied Plainness if you mean that in some places is no better than plain Falshood in others plain Error it 's true enough Or if you mean Plainness in respect of Style it 's homely enough and hardly plain Sence But if you mean Plainness of Simplicity without double-tonguedness I utterly deny it For when you speak of things that one would think at first Glance you intend Truth by it 's nothing so No Jesuite in the World can out-do you at Equivocation and there lies your Natural Excellency You have impertinent Repetition enough your Concessions every where fall about your own Ears in your glozing Oppositions to the Truth you deny You design the rectifying the Mistakes of the Non-intelligent This is false it 's manifest you design the blinding of them more else why do you quote Dr. Owen and the Assembly for countenancing those Errors which you know they directly oppose Let but the Mistakes of the less Intelligent be removed their Stomachs will rise sufficiently against you and your Book too Neonom I have in nothing misrepresented Dr. Crisp 's Opinion nor mistaken his Sence Antinom This must be true or false and here is the turning Point of the whole Book Either Dr. Crisp was or you must be If you have not misrepresented him then according to your Representation he was so If you have misrepresented him and unjustly blackened him what are you But that which we have in hand is Falshood and Lying As to this Assertion of yours we shall prove you guilty of Falshood throughout the Book that though you have repeated some of Dr. Crisp's Words from time to time yet you have only repeated such part of his Words as might render him odious not those that give a true and can did Sence of what he intended and herein you misrepresented him and that on purpose Now the Spirit of God lays the Formal Nature of a Lie upon an Intention to deceive or to deal injuriously with others as in the Case of Doeg Though I do not design now to come to Particulars I will give one Instance wherein you in your Book and your Party do frequently expose Dr. Crisp and his Abettors such as you call Divers as also Crispians and Antinomians that he and they do assert Sin can do no hurt and you would have Men understand that he means That no Person in Christ need fear to commit Sin and that Sin
in it's Abstract Nature is good That Dr. Crisp renders Sin innocent that is your Expression pag. 198. Now you charge him for saying That the grossest Sin that a Believer can commit can't do him the least harm neither ought they to fear the least hurt by their own Sins pag. 181. By this you would give us to understand that he means Sin is in its self Innocent and that Sin bears no Evil Fruits of its self that it may be boldly committed without Fear Whereas Dr. Crisp declares plainly and with much endeavour to prevent Mistakes that the Hurt he means is only the Penal Effects of Sin and declares again and again he speaks this not to encourage Sin He speaks of the Sins of a Believer in Christ they that are under the Dominion of Grace He speaks not of Sins to be committed but that these ought to be looked upon as the most odious and hateful things in the World and that which here he doth speak is only upon the Account of some poor distressed Consciences whose Sins lay so much upon them as thereby their Souls were driven from the Grace of God in Christ For to prove this take only a few of his Words you shall hear many more heareafter Dr. C. p. 513. Thus I speak of Sin not as it smiles upon a Man with a promising Countenance before it be committed For it is most dreadful and odious to the Faithful as that which crucifyed the sweetest Lord but as already committed and lying upon the Conscience of a Believer endeavouring to drive him to deny the Free-Grace and Love of God and the All-sufficiency of Christ In this regard it is crucifyed by Christ and so a Believer need not be afraid of Sin the Hand-writing of Ordinances is taken away His whole Discourse is to evince that the condemning Nature of Sin is taken away the Fear he speaks of is only in respect of Sins that a Believer hath fallen into and to prevent their falling into unbelieving Despair Now let any Intelligent Person judge whether you have not misrepresented Dr. Crisp and basely traduced him You your self say pag. 11. The Obliquity of the Fact against the Precept shall not hurt where the Sanction of the Law is answered I think this being duly weighed is worse than any thing Dr. Crisp sayeth I 'll instance in one Misrepresentation more For you charge him for holding the Uselesness and Unprofitableness of Holiness in saying Graces and Holiness do us not the least Good Dr. Crisp p. 41. Preaching upon Christ the way sheweth Christ to be the way to Justification and saith You that are Believers are in a near way to Salvation Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved Such a near way Christ is yet still People will be cavilling Where are good Works all this while what justified by Faith alone Saved by Christ alone I tell you if Christ be the way to Eternal Life then Works are not the way except they be Christ But must we not work Yea but for other purposes i. e. than for Justification and obtaining eternal Life by them the Lord hath propounded other Ends for which you are to work Ye are bought with a price That 's done therefore glorify God in your Bodies being delivered out of the Hands of your Enemies weare to serve him in Holiness and Righteousness He saith much to this purpose often speaks in the High Commendation of Holiness but speaks against putting it in the place of Christ By these things we may see what Credit is to be given to you when you make it so much of your business in Pulpit and publick places to charge Men and Books with saying those things which they never spake and meaning such things as they never intended And let all Men judge whether you have not misrepresented this good Man whom in the end of this Preface you own to have been a holy Man And could that be true if you have not misrepresented him as to what he said of Sin and Good Works and spoken here a very great Falshood These two Proofs may serve to evince for the present which also shall be made good that it is so in most if not all the Chapters of your Book more or less The great Quarrel you have with him is that he makes it so much his business to vindicate the Honour of Free Grace and of the Lord Jesus in our whole Salvation and in Justification to exclude Works altogether You talk of Works necessary to Salvation but how You mean as a working Condition whereby you put Works in the place of Christ and mean as your Oracle plainly speaks For you are not so honest as he but play the Jugler more He saith Quoniam Christus Mediator Fides in Christum Method Theolog p. 394. § 36. Par. 2. sunt tantum media ad hominem Deo per sanctitatem amorem restituendum Ideo sine Hesitatione dicendum est ex natura rei Fidem Sanctitatem amorem Dei ad salutem magis esse necessaria quà m aut fides in Christum aut Christi ipsius Sacrificium I will not construe it for the Reputation of him that wrote it but their 's a Bone for you to pick And I think to all Learned Men it gives your whole meaning in making such a noise as you do which you think in very allowable Terms that none dare oppose you in that works are necessary to Salvation Neonom His Scheme is this That by God's meer electing Decree all saving Blessings are by Divine Obligation made ours Antinom He never erected his Scheme and cast Theological Figures as you have done to find out a new Gospel He took his Measures of Truth from the Word of God but Bernardus non videt omnia some things he might be mistaken in as well as others But you say that he said By God's Electing Decree all saving Blessings are by Divine Obligation made ours But where 's the Expression I remember it not He might say That from God's Electing Grace it proceeds that all Divine Blessings are made ours by Obligation in the Terms that you have put it its improper because it seems to confound Election and the Covenant of Grace I can say nothing further to that till I see his Words being not willing to believe your reporting of them For it 's manifest you make to Conscience to misrepresent any Man to put your Meanings and draw your Consequences upon him Neonom But he saith There 's nothing more needful to our Title to these Blessings Antinom Is not this Spirare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the First Rate Doth not Dr. C. assert Christ to be needful to Salvation and as our Title Doth he not assert the Covenant of Grace to be needful the Free Gift of Grace Sure Christ and the Covenant of Grace are both distinguish'd from Election and these he affirms needful to our Title to Blessings But Blessings in your Sence are
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
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
of Grace a Covenant of Legislation and so a new Law directly opposed to the Covenant of Promise as we do make appear Was not the condition appointed to Adam by God's Command and had antecedent Power given him to perform Is it not unreasonable to command the performance of a condition where the Commander knows there is no Power to perform Is it consistent with the Wisdom of God to command an Impossibility to his Creature as a Covenant-condition And is it just to deal with him upon his Non-performance according to the Sanction of a Law And you say His Duty no less by being made Terms c. You should have said Legally much more In stead of Terms of the Benefit you should have said Terms of the Covenant if you had spoken properly And as for the Grant you speak of it 's but conditional and there 's no Grant at all pleadable till the Condition be performed Neonom The Covenant tho conditional is a Disposition of Grace There 's Grace in giving Ability to perform the Condition as well as bestowing the Benefits God's enjoyning one in order to the other makes not the Benefit to be the less given D. W. p. 55. Antâ—nom In a conditional Covenant that is a Covenant of Works in the highest Sence there is always a Disposition of Grace to the Creature even in that by which the very good Angels stand and was in that made with Adam It 's Grace that God offers Happiness to his Creature upon any Terms when he is in a capacity to perform them It 's Grace to take his Creature into Covenant The Angels are saved by Grace and so would Man have been if he had stood and though he fell there was that Grace you speak of in giving Ability to perform the condition and giving it before he put the condition upon him which is not here for you 'll have the condition put upon a Sinner before the Disposition of Grace to give him Ability which makes it a harsh dealing and unreasonable and hence far from Grace and therefore this enjoyning makes not only less Grace but no Grace Neonom It 's a Display of God's Wisdom in conferring the Benefit suitably to the Nature and State of Man in this Life whose Eternal Condition is not Eternally decided but are in a state of Trial yea the Conditions are but a meetness to receive the Blessings Antinom Gross Divinity I had thought Christ in the Covenant had been the great display of God's Wisdom 1 Cor. 1. But you must have a pitiful condition an imperfect sinful Righteousness instead of him and a Covenant agreeable to the corrupt Nature and State of Men and indeed so is yours for there 's nothing suits more with our carnal corrupt Hearts than to seek Salvation in such a way as you pretend to And is not the State of Believers decided in this Life But is it still a contingent Axiom that John a true Believer shall be saved What miserable consequences will hence be inferr'd the conditions are still performing these Federal Conditions and Subjective Qualifications it may be the Man may not perform them all and then he perisheth Eternally there 's no certainty of Salvation here no Man can have any more than an Opinion of it shake hands with the Papists and Arminians Nay hence it seems that all the Grace given here is no part of Eternal Life but qualifying conditions to make them meet for it Federally and that in true English is to make them merit it Lastly All the Doctrine of Election is hereby overthrown you may tear out Eph. 1. and Rom. 9. and several other places of Scripture out of your Bible No Man's Eternal Condition is by the Eternal God decided The best Man is but upon his Tryal as Adam was whether he will stand or fall Neonom I will shew you the Reason why we use the word Condition 1. Because it best suits with Man's Relation to God in his presents Dealings with us as Subjects in Tryal for Eternity D.W. p. 55. Antinom I know not why you should make any Apology for using the word for undoubtedly it best suits with your System of Divinity though it would not have suited with Paul's conditions it will suit our Nature that are Dead in Trespasses without strength in the Flesh and cannot please God in the performance of any conditions and it suits his present Dealings you say in way of tryal for our Eternal Estate upon our good Behaviour in performance of after conditions as well as first conditions our Calling Election Justification Union with Christ the Promises of Perseverance all doth not decide our eternal Estate nothing but our final Performance of conditions Lord have Mercy upon us and our Ministers Where 's our Gospel Neonom Christ as Priest hath merited all Antinom He ought then to be content and not except against your Scheme you allow him enough Neonom But as King or Priest upon his Throne he dispenseth all he enjoyns the Conditions in order to the Benefits and makes the Benefits Motives to our Complivnce with the Conditions He treats with Men as his Subjects whom he will now Rule and hereafter Judge Antinom Now he comes to his Rectoral Rule of Government and gives forth his new Law I had thought Christ had been a King and exerted his Kingly Office upon the Cross as well as upon the Throne but now you say he acts as a King or Priest upon the Throne and as such either King or Priest you know not which he enjoyns Conditions in order to Benefits You should speak plainly you mean He sets up a new Law justifies or condemns Men by the Works of this Law and treats all the World as redeemed Subjects deals with them according to this new Law bringing them upon their Tryal for Eternity Your meaning is that Christ hath merited a Power to himself to exercise Dominion in the Earth and bring Men under his Tryal and Judicature in performance of Conditions and they that are saved shall be saved by his Regal Power It 's enough for his Priestly Office that it merited what he was to do as King But not all for the first Grace must not come from his Merits and now there 's but a little Use for his Priesthood all the rest depend upon our Conditions Neonom Now what word is so proper to express the Duty as enjoyned means of Benefits like this Word Conditions Antinom It seems you hug this Word Condition extreamly Neonom Yes I do There 's few Author's of Note even of any Perswasion but make use of this Word in my Sence viz. Twiss Rutherford c. Antinom Few of them understood the Word as you do or at least made use of it in your Sence But whether they understood it so or not it 's no great matter I would wish you to build a Condition-School where all Persons might resort to the hearing Condition-Lectures to sit them to understand your Terms of Art in
Preaching And let us consider a little the Nature of it Condition comes under several Considerations 1. Logical and there it 's Conditio conditionans or Conditio conditionata It 's more Ordinis aut Relationis respectu Ordinis It ariseth from a Priority and Posteriority of things All things can't be at once but one thing must be before another and here one thing is the condition of another respectu temporis there is Conditio relativa and so all Arguments are mutual Conditions one of another and consist è mutuâ alterius affectione and here is not Prioritas temporis sed nature Pater est conditio Filii or rather Paternitas relata affectio est causa filietatis correlata affectionis There is Conditio Axiomatica which ariseth from a Contingent Axiom or necessary and either connex because they 're mostly express'd Conjunctione connexivâ si And so there is also Conditio in dispositione Syllogisticâ ex dependentia inter conclusiones premissa There is also Law-Conditions Dr. Cawel saith It is a Rate Manner or Law annexed to Men's Acts or Grants staying and suspending the same and making them uncertain whether they shall take effect or no. And Papinian saith Conditio dicitur cum quid in casum incertum qui potest tendere ad esse aut non esse confertur This is a general Account of a Condition as arising out of a Contingency the effect depending upon an uncertain Cause And a Learned Lawyer saith A Condition is a Restraint or Bridle annexed and joyned to a Promise by the performance of which it 's ratifyed and takes effect and by the Non-performance of it becomes void Such a Condition I perceive you and Mr. Flavel will have Faith to be a Condition upon which the Promise is made and the Performance suspended by the Disposer till the said Condition be performed Conditio adimpleri debet priusque sequatur effectus Now this being your Condition I say it 's Foederal It 's Conditio Foederalis and let it be in value less or more it makes a Covenant of Works and is cloathed with all the Logical Notions of Condititions besides The Logical Conditions are in all things ex necessitate dependentiae mutuae rerum and a Man can't move a Hand or Tongue without them Even Brutes and all inanimate Beings as well as Men they belong to the whole Fabrick and Constitution of created Beings But a Foederal Condition belongs only to rational Beings and it 's related to the Promise ex pacto in a way of Merit and the Promise belongs to it by way of Debt And in this Sence the Apostle always decries the Law or any Law to have to do with our Justification he affirms that it 's always of Grace and never of Debt upon the least Consideration whatever of our Performance and Qualification And this is the Condition that I contend against and say That neither Faith or any other Gracious Qualifications or Graces of the Spirit are Foederal Conditions or Conditions of the Covenant of Grace My Arguments some of them in brief are these That which is a Gift of the Promise of eternal Life is no condition of it but Faith is a gift of the Promise Ergo. For the Major it 's clear for one thing can't be another eodem respectu tempore The Condition and Promise are Opposita they are Foederalia relata and therefore Contraria affirmantia a Father can't be a Son in that respect as he is a Father As to the Minor it 's out of all doubt by Divine Testimony See John 17.3 Eph. 2.8 To know Christ by Faith is Eternal Life and this Life of Faith is the Gift of God Hence Faith that is the Benefit promised is not the condition of it A Promise or Gift of the Promise cannot be the Condition of it self 2. That which would make the Promise a Debt and the Gift of it a Reward of Debt is not to be allowed But to make Faith a Foederal Condition of the Covenant of Grace would make the Promise to be Debt and the Reward a Reward of Debt Therefore Faith is not to be allowed to be a Condition of the Covenant For the Major it will stand with invincible strength from the Apostle Paul's Divinity and Logick Rom. 4.4 Believing and working are opposed as working and not working as Contradicentia It 's vain and frivolous to shift by evasive Interpretations and all that 's said to that purpose is easily wip'd off For the Minor That putting Faith in as a Federal condition would make the Promise a Debt The Performance of any Work or doing any Act as a Federal Condition let it be never so small the promising Federator becomes indebted thereby to bestow the Benefit promised on the Confoederator ex obligatione foederali and therefore a Debtor Now the Apostle will not allow any thing of this in the least Measure In those places where the Apostle opposeth Faith to Works he speaks of such Works as contain perfect and perpetual Obedience such as God required of man under the Law but not of those Works which comprehend that Obedience which God requires of us who believe in Christ Racov. Catech. c. 9. Therefore your Doctrine of Conditions is Socin 3. That Doctrine which will make all the Graces of Sanctification or gracious Qualifications Federal Conditions is not to be admitted But to say Faith is a condition of the Covenant in the Sence pleaded for will bring in all other Graces as well as it's self Ergo this Doctrine is not to be admitted for there is as much reason that all of them be allowed to be Conditions as that Faith should and therefore I see you and your Party bring in Repentance and other Graces together with Faith and say Our eternal Life is given unto us at the last upon conditional Meetness for it But the Scripture no where speaks of our Justification for or by Repentunce Love Patience Mortification of Sin c. not so much as once in the Sence that it speaks of Justicfiation by Faith And therefore Faith justifies not in it's qualifying nature which it hath in common with other Graces of the Spirit God never intended our strictest Holiness and highest degrees of Grace should be our Justifying Righteousness before God or Federal Conditions of the Covenant of Grace 4. That any Act of ours should be a Federal Condition of the Covenant of Grace destroys the very Nature of it Rom. 11.6 Eph. 2.8 9. Tit. 2.5 Rom. 5.17 18. Isa 55.1 2. 1 Cor. 2.12 Rom. 3.24 as it stands in opposition to the Covenant of Works it can't be distinguished otherwise from the Covenant of Works for the Condition of the Covenant of Works was as small as any thing imagining the Ability was given before the Condition was required He should have had persevering Grace in the Promise had he outstood this Temptation Now the formal difference between the Covenant of Works and Grace was in the Condition
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
our harm tho' it be so for the present in our own apprehension Neonom Because God can and doth over-rule these to some good at last therefore they do no harm in the mean while nor in any degree Antinom We speak not against the hurt of sin in its nature and natural effects nor the seeming hurt of sin and the effects of it but how evil soever it be through the grace of God over-ruling it all the seeming yea real hurt that it doth at present shall be for good and is good in the wise way and end of God tho' not apparently so yet the Promise is to be believed Neonom Because a Believer is freed from the Curse of the Law therefore no Gospel threatning of Christ can reach him Antinom Where no Curse of the Law can reach there nothing you call a Gospel threat can do a real hurt for that is not what we call so but what the wise God doth make so Neonom Because some good Men are sometimes humbled and awakened by sin as it 's an evil therefore to them it is not evil Antinom Whatever is for humbling and awakening of a sinner is good to that sinner and no real hurt that that is malum simpliciter either naturale or contristativum may be good in ordine ad finem and secundum quid as to cut off a Leg or Arm is malum naturale contristativum but in order to the saving the whole Body it 's bonum necessarium many causes act not sua facultate sed externa and that is when a thing produceth an effect by an external direction and gubernation that it hath no internal disposition to nor it may be an immediate agent might not intend or design Vt Phereo Jasoni profuit hostis qui gladio vomicam ejus aperuit quam sanare Medici non poterant The Enemy did Jason a kindness when by a thrust of a Sword he opened an Imposthumation that the Physicians could not cure So Commission of Sin through Divine Disposal and the Promise of Grace serves to lay open some latent Corruption or other in the Children of God which becomes of great benefit and advantage to them Neonom The Assembly is of my mind they say the Threatnings of the Law are of use c. Antinom But you leave out what you please c. 19. they say Although a true Believer be not under the Law as a Covenant of Works to be thereby justified or condemned yet it is of great use to them to inform them of the Will of God and the Threatnings to shew what Sin deserves Who denies all they say But observe They say a Believer is not under the Law for Condemnation Neonom But they say c. 17. Saints may through Temptation and the prevalency of Corruption fall into grievous Sins and continue therein for a time and incur God's Displeasure and grieve his Spirit and come to be deprived in some measure of their Graces and Comforts have their Hearts hardned their Consciences wounded hurt and scandalize others and bring temporal Judgments upon themselves Antinom All this is granted and yet we are not affected by it in our true sense and meaning we say Sin is hurtful and bears all manner of evil Fruits but through the Victory that we have in Christ Sin shall not bring upon us the Curse of the Law nor condemning Penal Effects Castigations proceeding from a fatherly hand are the Priviledges of his adopted Children whether it be exercised in outward Afflictions or inward Withdrawings And this is the Hurt that is all along spoken of we intend not Sin in its own Nature and those Effects that naturally proceed from it nor the Aspect it hath upon ourselves or others in all which it carries odium and mischief with it The sole reason why it hurteth not in a way of condemnation is from the Propitiation and Advocateship of Jesus Christ in whom and by whom that hurt is taken away which we speak of Calvin But Mr. Neonomian saith he hath not wronged the Doctor in this Charge nor mis represented him Repl. p. 47. Neonom I say he doth very oft say and frequently attempt to prove that Sin can do no hurt Antinom In what sense doth he speak it doth he intend Sin in its own nature hath no hurt in it or that it can do no hurt in its Penal Effects hurt must be understood in one of these senses Neonom I never designed to charge him with it in the first sense for he saith Sin is a Lion there 's its nature and a dead Lion there 's its calmness and because it 's dead it 's not to be feared it 's a Traytor that 's its nature and bound hand and foot that 's its inability to harm Antinom But you say he makes Sin innocent to the Elect that 's to change the Nature of it not to remove the Effects a Traytor may be bound and be a Traytor still tho' not to be feared Neonom He hath said too much to make it harmless to the Elect Antinom It must be harmless to the Elect so far as Christ bore Sin for them or else he bore it in vain but if the Doctor had thought Sin had no hurt in it he need not have insisted so much upon Christ's bearing Sin for us that Sin might not wound us to death Neonom I tell you I do not charge him for saying Sin as to its own Nature hath no hurt in it Antinom Where lies the fault then is it in saying Sin as to its Penal Effects can do them that are in Christ no harm Neonom He says not so and yet those are most of the hurts that come for Sin Antinom Mark Gentlemen he denies that this is his meaning he saith not those very Words and Syllables but what is it that he proves his Position by viz. There 's not one Sin or all the Sins together of a Believer can do him the least real hurt he proves it from Rom. 7. l. c. 8.1 After complaint against the remaining of Corruption in him he thanks God through Christ and saith there 's no Condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus pag. 511. and from Isaiah 43. p. 512. I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgression c. where he saith What prejudice can that do that is blotted out Every Debt of a Believer is a cancelled Debt so that the Lord himself hath nothing to lay to a Believer's charge it is Christ was wounded for his Peoples sins Isaiah 53. It 's true our sins themselves do not speak Peace but Christ bearing sin and the wrath that these sins do deserve And again Tho' naturally sin hath a sting yet there is a victory over this sting Christ is the death of it as he took away the sting of it Now let any impartial Person judge whether this be not the Hurt of Sin which the Doctor intends and besides that you judge it to be his meaning appears 1. Because you