thing into the similitude of a truth at pleasure that can beleeve or conceive that Christs preaching on the Mount ordaining Disciples reproving the Scribes and Pharises working miracles and the like which were parts of his obedience to the Law should be imputed to a woman â—or example instead of her obedience and love and faithfulnesse to her Husband and that she should be reputed before God to have performed all these duties according to the strict forme and exigencie of â—he Law because Christ performed the forenamed duties and these by imputation are made hers CAP. X. A second ground against the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ in the sense formerly rejected drawn from the transcendencie of the nature of it A Second Reason SECT 1 why the active obedience or righteousnesse of Christ cannot in the parts and proprietie of it be imputed unto any man whatsoever for righteousnesse may be contrived and cast into this frame That righteousnesse which is exactly and precisely fitted to the person and office of him that is mediator betweene God and man or Redeemer of the world cannot be imputed unto any other man for his righteousnesse But such is the righteousnesse of Christ a righteousnesse precisely fitted to the person and Calling of a mediator c. Therefore it cannot be imputed unto any other man whatsoever for righteousnesse unto him The minor proposition I conceive will be yeelded without much striving If any man will undertake to finde any such flaw in the righteousnesse of Christ that doth amount to the least degree of an incongruitie or inconsistencie with his office of mediator attempts no lesse then the undermining the foundations of the peace of the world and laying the hope of the salvation of men in the dust Such an High Priest saith the Apostle Heb. 7.26 it became us to have i. that it was necessary we should have if we looked for salvation by him that is holy harmlesse undefiled separate from sinners c. And woe unto the world if the least either spot or blemish could be found in this High Priest or his righteousnesse Therefore I presume that the deere interest which every man layeth claime to in the truth of this proposition will secure it from all violence of contradiction from any man So that if there be any thing weake and unconcluding in the Argument it must be sought for in the major Proposition Therfore let us cause that to passe through the fire and see whether any flame will kindle upon it The tenor of this was that that righteousnesse which is exactly fitted to the person and office of a Mediator cannot be imputed for righteousnesse unto any other man How a conceipt of any such imputability should lodge quietly in any mans thoughts I confesse I cannot comprehend The whole generation of Disputers for that imputation SECT 2 which we oppose generally interpret the phrase of having the righteousnesse of Christ imputed by being cloathed with this righteousnesse of Christ or with the robes of his righteousnesse Now then he that assumeth this righteousnesse of Christ unto himselfe and apparelleth and arayeth himselfe with it represents himselfe before God not in the habit of a just or righteous Man but in the glorious attire of him that makes men iust and righteous the great Mediator of the world whose righteousnesse hath heights and depths in it a length and breadth which insinitely exceed the dimensions and proportions of all men whatsoever And as John speaking as is probable of his transfiguration in the Mount or whether it be of any other manifestation of his glory it is not much materiall useth these words Joh. 1.14 We beheld his glory as the glory of the only begotten of the Father meaning that the glory wherein Christ then appeated was so supertranscendently glorious and excellent that it exceeded the rank and quality of the creature whether Angel or Man and was meet only for him to weare that was the only begotten of the Father i. the naturall Sonne of God the greatnesse of the person could not but have bin acknowledged by that vestment of glory which he then had on so may and must it be acknowledged and said of the righteousnesse of his life that it was peculiarly appropriated to him that was the only begotten of the Father the great Saviour and Redeemer of the world Neither did that glory of his which Iohn saw further transcend the condition of the creature then the glory of this righteousnesse doth Now then for a silly worme a sinfull and contemptible creature to take this robe of unmeasurable Majesty upon it and to conceit it selfe as great in holinesse and righteousnesse as Iesus Christ himselfe for that is the spirit that rules in that opinion to teach men to assume all that Christ did unto themselves and that in no other way nor upon any lower terms then as if themselves had personally done it whether this be a behaviour and deportment of soule of that grace and acceptance on High which many have suffered themselves to be perswaded of whether it will rellish well in the eye of jealousie or no I earnestly desire that men would make it a matter of Conscience seriously to consider and re-examine All the parts of his righteousnesse all the acts of obedience that he performed he performed them as one that had received the spirit without measure i.e. there was a weightinesse and worth in them which did fully answere the fullnesse of that grace that was given unto him above all his fellows a title of honour wherewith the Holy Ghost is pleased to honour the Saints yea those acts of obedience though hee wrought them in the humane nature or as he was Man yet by reason of the neere neighbourhood and streight combination of the God head in the unitie of the same person they could not but receive excellent impressions from that also The righteousnesse was in all the parts and circumstances of it such as became God himselfe in personall union with his creature the humane nature Now whether that be not to be accounted robbery and that of a high nature for the creature to assume an equality of righteousnesse whether by imputation or however with God himselfe I leave to the sober and unpartiall thoughts of men to consider But especially there are some streyns in this righteousnesse of Christ that cannot be appropriated or applyed unto any other whatsoever without notorious and manifest impiety All that Christ taught and preached on earth was part of his righteousnesse and obedience For I have not spoken of my selfe saith he Ioh. 12.49 but the Father that sent me gave me a commandement what I should say and what I should speake Therfore when he speaketh these and many such like words I am the light of the world Come unto me all that are wearie and heavie laden and I will refresh you c. is it meet for any other to conceive them as spoken by himselfe in his owne
measure God is in holinesse righteousnesse goodnesse wisdome truth mercy c. and that he is so light or such a light in whom there is no darknesse at all 1 Joh. 1.5 And in this sense the light of the knowledge of God is said to be given by the ministers of the Gospell in the face of Iesus Christ 2 Cor. 4.6 meaning that those who truly and effectually preach Iesus Christ unto men and hold him forth in all the glory and excellencie of all that he both did and suffered in the world as they are left upon record by the Holy Ghost in the Gospell doe with one and the same labour certify informe the world what manner of essence and being in respect of hâ—linesse grace love sweetnesse mercy goodnesse bounty c. the true God is with whom they have to doe All these excellencies being apparantly extant and visible and that in the full transcendencie and height of their severall perfections in that obedience which Christ exhibited in the flesh unto God it cannot with any colour or pretence of reason be imagined but that that God from whom he came forth and whose servant hee was in all this great administration and from whom he must of necessitie receive and be furnished with all that strength and power of grace whereby he was enabled to do all these great things must needs be a God supereminently glorious in all the same and like perfections So that we see here is another end and that of maine consequence of the active obedience of Christ besides imputation Thirdly SECT 7 another end of this righteousnesse of Christ we speake of is the exemplarinesse of it it is the patterne in the Mount for all Adams posteritie to work by It is true the Law it selfe is as absolute and perfect a rule or patterne of righteousnesse as the conformity or obedience of Christ himselfe to it is but it is not so plaine and distinct a rule in some cases as the obedience of Christ to it And therefore the Holy Ghost sometimes briefly mentioning the letter or rule of the Law maketh use of the exemplarinesse of the obedience of Christ as it were to illustrate and interpret it And walke in love even as Christ hath lovedus and hath given himselfe for us c. Ephes 5.2 with many the like Fourthly the intire obedience and subjection of Christ to the Morall Law is of excellent importance and hath a Spirit of provocation in it to draw all the world after it in imitation of it it is a tempting righteousneste or an holy strong and blessed temptation to the world to worke righteousnesse the force and power whereof no man can withstand but with an high hand of desperate wickednesse and to the deepe shame and reproach of his person This end likewise is oft mentioned or insinuated in the Scriptures Take my yoke upon you and learne of me saith our Saviour himselfe Mat. 11.29 for I am meeke and lowly in heart c. implying that there was in his meeknesse not only a patterne or example to follow but a provocation also to make them willing and desirous to follow See Ephes 5.24.25 1 Pet. 4.1 with many others Fiftly the righteousnesse of Christ now under consideration was a meanes of continuing his person in the love and complacencie of his Father which was a thing of absolute necessitâ—e for the carrying through and accomplishing that great worse of Redemption which he had undertaken For if the mediator himselfe upon whose favor and interest with God the favor peace and salvation of the whole world depended should have but once miscarried and displeased him who should have mediated for him or made an attonement or reconciliation for him If salt hath lost the savor there is nothing to season it againe withall because all things are to be seasoned by it This end of his obedience and subjection to his Father himselfe plainly expresseth Joh. 15.10 If yee keepe my commandements you shall abide in my love even as I have kept my Fathers commandements and abide in his love See also Joh. 8.29 Sixtly that righteousnesse of Christ we speake of SECT 8 was of absolute necessitie to qualifie and fit the sacrifice for the Altar I meane to render him a person meet by his death and sacrifice of himselfe to make attonement for the world and to purge and take away the sinne of it It is true the infinitnesse of the value and considerablenesse of his death sprang from the God-head or Divine nature with which the humanitie of Christ had personall union yet was the absolute holinesse and righteousnesse of the humanitie it selfe of necesâ—ary concurrence also thereunto and that in two respects First there is no capacity in any part or parcell of the humane nature of personall union with the Divine except it be absolutely free from all touch and tincture and spot of sinne otherwise this proposition might be verified that God is sinfull a sound which neither the eares nor consciences of men are able to beare That God should die though it be a conclusion which to reason not yet taught or principled from above may seeme of the same hardnesse and inconsistencie with the other yet we know it is become not only familiar and of easy admittance but of very precious and sweet importance in the Schoole of Christianity But that God should finne is a saying of a greater offence and abhorring to reason proselyted and made Christian then to reason yet only it selfe and no more Secondly suppose for argument sake a possibilitie of that which is unpossible that the Divine nature might be hypostatically or personally united to an humanity tainted with sinne yet could it not give an infinitnesse of expiatory value or acceptation thereunto for others in case it were offered or made a sacrifice by it The reason is because such an offering or sacrifice were of absolute necessitie for the expiation of its owne sinne or at least it should be due and the justice of God might lawfully require it in such a way For no relation whatsoever of any creature to the Divine nature it selfe or to any person subsisting therein be it never so neere and intimate is able to dissolve or make voide any right or power which is essentiall to God as the right of requiring a full satisfaction for sinne is wheresoever or in what creature soever he findes it Now then whatsoever God either doth or in justice may require of any man to make satisfaction for his owne sinne unpossible it is that with the payment or tender thereof he should make satisfaction for the sinnes of others as it is unpossible in a course of Law and Civill Justice that a man by paying his owne debt should thereby discharge another mans The High Priest under the Law did not make atâ—onement for himselfe and for the people with one and the same sacrifice but saith the Scripture he offered sacrifice first for his owne sinnes and then
more necessary then Faith it selfe for Faith is made only a meanes of the derivation of it upon men but the body and substance of the righteousnesse it selfe is nothing else but the pure Law and the workes of it And how a righteousnesse should be said to be made manifest without the Law whose essence strength and substance is nothing but the Law I conceive to be out of the reach of better apprehensions then miâ—â— to comprehend If it be here objected and said SECT 2 that this righteousnesse of God or of Faith may be said to be made manifest without the Law or the works of it because there are no works required of us towards the raising of it but this hinders not but that the workes of the Law as performed by Christ may be the matter and substance of it To this I answere First this Sanctuary hath been already polluted and the horns of this Altar broken downe in the demonstration of the former proofe Secondly there is not the least intimation given that the Apostle should have any such by or back meaning as this but that this righteousnesse of Faith should be fully taught and apprehended without any consideration of the Law or the works thereof as an ingredient into it Thirdly the works of the Law are neverthelesse the works of the Law because performed by Christ The greatnesse or holinesse of the person working according to the Law doth not alter or change the nature or property of the works but they are the works of the Law whosoever doeth them Christs being Christ doth not make the Law not to be the Law Fourthly this righteousnesse is said to receive testimony or witnesse from the Law that is from that part of Scripture which is often called the Law viz. the Books of Moses Mat 5 17. and c. 7 12. as Calvin here well interprets and from the Prophets therefore it cannot be a righteousnesse consisting in the imputation of a legal righteousnesse because there will be found no testimony given either by the Law or by the Prophets to such a righteousnesse except it be in aenigmate a testimony in a riddle which no man can finde out but by divination instead of an interpretation whereas it is repugnant to the nature of a testimony not to be somewhat plaine and expresse that it may be well understood But if we interpret this righteousnesse of God to be a righteousnesse procured or derived upon a man by Faith oâ— beleeving there is expresse testimony to be found given unto it both by the Law and also by the Prophets as the holy Ghost expressely here affirmeth by the Law Gen. 15 6 And he Abraham beleeved in the Lord and he counted it unto him for righteousnesse By the Prophets Hab. 2.4 But the just shall live by his Faith Fiftly and lastly this righteousnesse of God is said to be unto all upon all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through Faith by way of opposition to the works of the Law ver 20. Now betweene Faith and the Law or works of the Law there is a constant oposition in the writings of this Apostle Rom. 3.27.28 and ag c. 4.13 14. and c. 9.32 and c. 10.5 6. Gal. 2 16. and c. 3.5 and ver 11.12 c. But betweene the Law and the works or righteousnesse of Christ there is no opposition but a perfect agreement Therefore that righteousnesse which is by Faith cannot stand in the righteousnesse of Christ imputed CAP. V. A Fourth Demonstration from Scripture of the avouched Conclusion FOurthly SECT 1 against the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ in the sense already disclaimed for that righteousnesse by which we are justified in the sight of God I argue from Rom. 5. ver 16. and 17. compared together The guift of righteousnesse as it is called ver 17. which is by Christ in the Gospel is said ver 16. to be a free guift of many offences unto justification From whence I thus reason That righteousnesse which is the guift of many offences that is the forgivenesse of many offences or sins unto justification cannot be a perfect legall righteousnesse imputed unto us or made ours by imputation But the righteousnesse which is by Christ in the Gospel by which we are justified is the guift of many offences unto justification Therefore it cannot be a perfect legall righteousnesse made ours by imputation The minor is the proposition of the Holy Ghost in terminis The major I demonstrate thus That righteousnesse which extends unto a mans justification by the forgivenes of sins can be no perfect legall righteousnesse imputed But the righteousnesse of Christ in the Gospel by which we are justified extendeth unto a mans justification by the forgivenesse of sins Therefore it can be no legall righteousnesse imputed The Reason of the former proposition the weaknesse of which only it must be that ministers strength to an adversary for further dispute in this question the authority of heaven being too pregnant in the other is this because a legall or perfect righteousnesse doth not preceed to jâ—stâ—â—y a mans person by way of forgivenesse of sins but is of it selfe intrinsecally and essentially a mans Iustification yea such a Iustification with which forgivenes of sinnes is not competible For what need hath he that is legally righteous or hath a legall righteousnesse imputed unto him of forgivenesse of sins when as such a righteousnesse excluds all sinne and all guilt of sinne from his person If it be here objected and said SECT 2 that a mans sinnes are first forgiven him and then this perfect righteousnesse of Christ is imputed unto him and so he is justified To this I answere First if we will needs distinguish the effects of the active and passive obedience of Christ after this manner so as from the active part of this obedience to fetch a perfect righteousnesse for imputation and from the passive remission of sinnes yet whether it be any waies reasonable to invert the order of these effects and dispose of them aâ— pleasure in a crosse method to their causes producing them I leave it to sober consideration Christ â—â—d not first die and after death keep the Law for us but he first kept the Law and then suffered death for us Therefore iâ— we will needs make the imputation of the one a distâ—nct bâ—n sit from the imputation of the other reason requireâ—â— that that which was first purchased should be first received or applied and consequently hat imputation of righteousnesse should have a precedency in order of râ—mission of sinnes Secondly if a man hath once sinned which must needs be acknowledged of every man that hath sins forgiven it is not any lâ—gall righteousnesse whatsoever imputed that can justifie him no if it were possible for him to keep the Law perfectly in his own person ever after to the daies of eternity this would not justify him because such a Iustification is repugnant to the expresse tenor of the Law Cursed is
is the act of Faith that Iustifieth As when a man putteth forth his arme and reacheth a pot or cup with drink in it wherewith he quencheth his thirst he may be said to quench his thirst instrumentally by reaching out his arme because this was a meanes to procure it So let men put what meaning or interpretation they please upon their words when they professe and acknowledg that it is Faith that Iustifieth if they meane at all as they say they must meane that it is the Act of Faith that Iustifieth because both that Faith by which a man beleeves in Christ is an act of Faith and againe that Faith by which a man is instrumentally Iustified is an act of Faith and that Faith that layeth hold upon the righteousnesse of Christ is an act of Faith too Therefore let men turne themselves any way and which way they please and make their words to fall either to the North or towards the South if they meane as they say that faith indeed Iustifieth they must meane that it is the act of faith that Iustifieth And when themselves will say that faith Iustifieth and yet will condemne it for an error in another that the act of faith should Iustify they cannot escape the hands of this dilemma but one of the horns will gore them either it must follow that they doe not meane as they say or that they condemne their owne opinion and meaning in another most true it is that it is far from truth to say that faith iustifyeth as it is an act and as far from truth it is to say that it is not the act of faith that Iustifieth If it be yet further replyed and said SECT 4 that when men say we are justified by Faith their meaning is that we are justified by that which faith apprehendeth and this is farre from saying that Faith is imputed for righteousnesse To this I Answer 1. if their meaning be simply and without limitation so that we are justified by that which Faith apprehendeth when they say we are justified by Faith then they speake more truth then they are aware of and as it seems more then they intend to speake For that Faith justifieth is most true but that whatsoever Faith apprehendeth should justifie hath no fellowship with truth no not so much as in appearance For By Faith we understand or apprehend the worlds were made Heb. 11.3 yet no man will say that the creation of the world justifies men Secondly if men ascribe justification in every respect and consideration to that which Faith apprehendeth they utterly overthrow that which generally they professe viz. the instrumentall justification of faith For if any thing that faith apprehendeth justifieth every way both materially and formally and meritoriously and principally and instrumentally c. Faith shall justifie no wayes and so when men say they are justified by Faith their meaning must be they are not at al justified by Faith but by some other thing Therfore of necessity it is that Faith must justifie some way if it iustifieth any way it must of neceility be by imputation or account from God for righteousnes because it is all that God requires of men to their iustification instead of the righteousnesse of the Law The fore if God shall not impute or account it unto them for this righteousnesse it would stand them in no stead at all to their iustificaetion because there is nothing usefull or availeable to any holy or saving purpose whatsoever but only to that whereâ—â— to God hath assigned it If God in the new Covenant of the Gospell requires faith in Christ for our iustification instead of the righteousnesse of the Law in the old and this Faith will not passe in account with him for such righteousnesse both his Commandement and Covenant for beleeving and the obedience it selfe of beleeving will both become voyd and of none effect the intire benefit of them being suspended upon the gracious pleasure and purpose of God in the designation of them to their end CAP. VIII Conteining the last proofe from Scripture for the Non-imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the sence controverted THere is yet one Scripture remaining happily amongst many more that have not yet manifested themselves in this Controversie that seems yea I verily beleeve SECT 1 doth more then seem quite to overthrow and take away that which must be the groundworke and foundation to set this imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ upon if ever it stands viz. the imputability or transferiblenesse of it from one to another If the Scriptures doe not only no where establish but in any place absolutely deny a possibility of the translation or removing of the righteousnesse of Christ from one person to another this will strike the fatall stroke in deciding this Question This I conceive will be evicted with a pregnancie irrefragable from that Scripture Gal. 3.12 And the Law is not of Faith but the man that doth them shall live in them This Scripture doth not barely and simply deny a deceivablenesle or possibility of translation of the righteousnesse of the Law from one person to another but denies it emphatically and with the utmost advantage of a deniall For it denies a possibility of it to be done even by that hand expresly and by name I meane the hand of faith which was the ikelyest hand under Heaven to have done it if the nature of the thing to be done had not resisted the doing of it The Apostle denyeth unto faith it selfe the office and power of being a Mediatrix in this case to derive or carry over the righteousnesse of the Law from one person to another By which it appeareth also that he had an intent particularly to make the righteousnesse of the Law as performed by Christ himselfe uncapable of this translation or imputation because faith never pretended nor ever could have ground or colour to pretend a deriving or translating of any other legall righteousnesse from one person to another for Justification but only that which was performed by Christ If there were any thing in all the world that could have done the thing that is pleaded for Faith indeed hath the preheminence of likely hood to do it because it doth derive a righteousnesse from one to another such a righteousnesse as is deriveable an imputative righteousnesse you may call it because it is such by account or interpretation I meane remission of sins this Faith derives from Christ upon him that beleeveth but for a righteousnesse of the Law it cannot derive because such a righteousnesse is not deriveable Let the words and scope of the Scripture mentionedbe narrowly examined SECT 2 and all this that hath been said will be found in the bowells of it And the Law is not of Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the man that doth them shall live in them or if you would translate the emphasis also which is in the originall thus the very doer of them the
man shall live The former clause after Pauls succinct and presse manner of expressing himselfe is very briefe and therefore somewhat obscure in it selfe but the latter clause easeth the burden of the dificulty and casteth a sufficient light upon it Whereunto if we adde but the dependance and reference that this verse hath upon the former Pauls meaning will bee found as cleere as the noone day Therefore when he saith the Law is not of faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the originall by or out of faith his meaning can be no other but this that the righteousnesse of the Law doth not arise or come upon any man out of his Faith or by his beleeving or that no man is made partaker of a legall righteousnesse by beleeving but saith he the very doer the man he shall live in or by them He proves the truth of the former clause from the expresse tenor of the Law or legall righteousnesse as standing in full opposition to any derivation of it from one to another even by Faith it selfe As if he should say no legall righteousnesse can come upon any man by beleeving because it is only the man himselfe that doth the things of the Law that shall be justified and live by them the righteousnesse of the Law never goeth further in the propriety or formalitie of it to the justification of any man then to the person of him that fulfills the Law That by the word Law in this place is meant the righteousnesse or fulfilling of the Law besides that there can hardly be made any reasonable interpretation of the clause if this word be taken in any other sense may appeare by the like acception of the same word the Law in other passages of this Apostle when it is used upon like occasion Rom. 4.13 for the promise was not to Abraham or his seed through the LAW i. through the righteousnes of or obedience unto the Law viz. that it should be obtained and enjoyed by any such righteousnesse as is evident by the opposition in the following clause but through the righteousnesse of faith i. this promise was not made unto him and his seed that the benefit and blessing of it should be obtained by the former but by the latter righteousnesse The word is againe used in the same signification in the very next verse For if they that be of the Law be heires i. that are for the righteousnesse of the LAVV. and will stand to be justified by that besides other places without number The scope likewise of the place and the dependence of the clause with the former ver SECT 3 apparantly evinceth this interpretation The Apostle in the former verse had delivered it for a truth that no man could be justified in the sight of God by the Law i. by the righteousnesse or works of the Law for this reason because the Scripture saith that the just shall live by faith Now because this consequence might seeme somewhat doubtfull and insuâ—ficient lying open to some such exception against it as this what though the just doe or must live by faith may they not be justified by the works of the Law too and live by them also may not the righteousnesse of the Law be made over unto them by faith and so compound righteousnesse be made for them of both together No saith Paul the Law is not of faith there can be no legal righteousnesse derived or drawn upon men by faith and that for this reason because such a righteousnesse is by the expresse letter and tenor of the Law consined and appropriated to the person of him that fulfills it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man himselfe that doth them shall live by them q. d. there is a repugnancy and contradiction in it ex naturarei in the very nature and effence of the thing that the righteousnesse of the Law should â—ver be removed or caried over from one mans person to another though it were attempted by the hand of Faith it selfe God never intended that the Law and faith should meet together to jumble up a justification for any man And whereas it is frequently charged as a matter of deep prejudice upon the opinion laboured for in this discourse that it magnityeth faith above measure and makes an Idol of it the truth is that the contrary opinion which ascribes to it a power of transferring a legall righteousnesse â—â—â—gnifieth it 7 times more and ascribes a power even of impossibilities to it Faith may boast of many great things otherwise and may remove mountaines but for removing any legall righteousnesse in the sense we speake of it must let that alone for ever There is a greater contrariety and indisposition in the severall natures of faith and the Law in respect of mixing or working together to make up a Iustification then was betweene the lion and Clay in Nebuchadnezzars vision Dan. 2.43 though in other things they well agree Repugnantia legis et fidei est saith Calvin in Gal. 3.12 in causa justificationis facilius enim aquam igni copulabis quam haec duo concilies homines fide et lege esse justos 1. There is a repugnancie betweene the Law and faith in the matter of Iustification and a man may sooner couple fire and water together then make these two agree that men are righteous by faith and yet by the Law too Consonant to this Scripture last opened is that Rom. 4.14 For if they which are of the Law be heires faith is made voyde and the promise is made of none effect Where you see as full and as irreconcileable an opposition betweene the righteousnesse of the Law and the righteousnesse of faith in respect of justification as is betweene East and West it is unpossible they should be brought together There is a greater gulfe fixed betweene them then was betweene Abraham and Dives faith cannot go over to the righteousnesse of the Law to joyne with that in Iustification neither can the righteousnesse of the Law bee brought over unto faith What reason there may bee conceived for this Non-imputabilitie of the righteousnesse of the Law See Cap. 21 we shall have a faire opportunity to declare in the prosecution of our grounds and reasons for the point we favor in this discourse which is the next thing we hast unto CAP. IX Wherein the first ground or argument for the conclusion undertaken is propounded and established HAving considered with as much diligence and faithfulnesse as frailty would permit how the Scriptures stand affected and incline in the controversie depending we are lead in the next place by the hand of a plaine and familiar method to propound such Arguments and considerations for the confirmation of the premisses as reason and sobriety of thoughts about the stated Question have suggested My first ground and argument to prove that the righteousnesse of Christ in the sence now under dispute viz. in the letter and proprietie of it cannot be imputed unto any for their
which follows close upon the former observation that either there was such an opinion then ruling in the Reformed Churches or at least taught and maintained by some eminent man one or more amongst them that held iustification to consist in Remission of sins onely otherwise those deep-advised sages of the Councel should have but put a dead slie into their box of oyntment by boltring into the ayre and indeed rather have forged a weapon for their adversaries then taken any from them If it were any particular and eminent man they struck at as an abettor of that opinion there can none be pitched upon with greater probability then Calvin who still carried matters of Religion against them at that time with a higher hand then any other And Bellarmine as we heard ingenuously confessed Calvin by name to be the man Thirdly and lastly from this passage observe how some mens either learning or memory misuseth them by suggesting to them that the opinion pleaded and contended for in this Treatise viz. the imputation of Faith for righteousnesse or which is the same that iustification stands in Remission of sins onely is an opinion confederate with Popish errors Certainly those great Agents and Factors for the Roman party would never have bin so farte overseene in their solemn and sacred assembly to have poured out the vials of their wrath upon the head of an opinion that was their owne The importune striving and contendings of some men to make Galvin for them in an opinion wherof doubtlesse his learning was never guilty have compelled us to make somewhat the longer labour and discourse of it for his rescue and to set him cleere upon his own principles and foundations If any man remains yet unsatisfied touching this Authors judgement in the point now under examination and desires rather an heape then enough it were an easie matter to make the pyle of testimonies from his own pen yet farre greater even to the wearying and punishing of such a man with his own desire Somewhat more then hath bin here delivered may be found in the first Chapter where also you may see this worthy Champion of the truth accompanied and seconded in this service with many of his fellows not much inferiour to him And this bv way of Answere in the first place to the objection that Remission of sins SECT 6 was not the whole but only a part of our Iustification Secondly I Answer that from the Scriptures themselves that were alledged it may be evidenced as by expresse demonstration that there is no more no other part or member of iustification but onely forgivenesse of sins that the nature and substance of it is fully comprehended in this What can be more pregnant then that Rom. 4 6 7. c. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne If there were any thing more belonging to this righteousnesse which is by imputation then only the forgivenesse of iniquity or the covering of sin would the Holy Ghost wholly have omitted it and left it out when he intended a description or declaration if it Especially would he have omitted that which is the maine and principall and formall part of it as the righteousnesse of Christ imputed is pretended to be If a man should prefix such a Title as this before a Book or over the head of a Mappe A description of the world c. and never so much in all his Book or Mappe as once mention Europe or Asia the chiefe parts of the world but onely some obscure and lesser Countries would it not argue that either he wanted wit himselfe or else hoped that his Readers would want it altogether Or if a Limner should be set on worke to draw a mans picture or portraicture and should only draw the trunk of his body without a face or head upon it were this the portraicture or description of a man No more would Paul or rather the Holy Ghost have called the forgivenesse of sinnes a description or declaration of the righteousnesse which is imputed by Faith if it had bin only a part and that the lesser and lesse materiall part of it It is true SECT 7 sometimes in Scripture by a Synechdoche a part is put for the whole as the persons of men and women consisting of bodies and soules are called soules Act. 7.14 and elsewhere But 1. this is never done in descriptions or declarations of things as when the Holyghost describes the creation of man expresse mention is made both of the materiall part the dust of the earth and likewise of the formall Gods breathing in his face the breath of life Neither in reason is that to be called the description of a thing which conceales and silenceth that which is best and the most beautifull part of it and onely mentioneth somewhat of inferiour consideration in it Secondly when such a figure is used a part put for the whole it is seldome or never that the worser and more ignoble part is mentioned but still the formall and better part as bodies are no where put for the persons of men but onely Soules Except happily in two cases 1. when the whole comes under consideration and is spoken of by reason of the inferiour part as somtimes the body of Christ or flesh of Christ is put for Christ himselfe as man and for the whole humane nature of Christ namely when that which is spoken of him hath its relation to him in respect of his body or flesh Or else 2. when the Holy Ghost would represent the weaknesse and contemptiblenesse of the condition of the whole then somtimes he calls the whole by the name of that which is the weakest part of it and the ground or cause of the vanitie and weaknesse of the whole As when it is said that All flesh is grasse c. by flesh meaning Men in respect of their weake and vanishing condition in this world Neither of which cases can be pretended in that description of Iustification Thirdly and lastly when this Figure Synechdoche is used in any of these or the like cases a part being put for the whole it is when things are plaine and evident so that by the part which is named and expressed that may readily be understood which is implyed as easie to be made out either by other places of Scripture or by common sence as in the instances given All flesh is grasse by flesh here no man can understand any thing else but men cloathed with flesh So Acts 7. where Iacob is said to come down into Egypt with threescore and fifteen soules no man can think that these soules came with him without their bodies But now it is farre otherwise in this description of iustification commended unto us by Paul That by forgivenesse of sins should be meant both
imputeing Adams sinne unto them because then an act of God should be as it were the life and soule of that sin which is in men Therfore men are not made formally just or righteous by any act of God imputeing righteousnesse unto them The Argument I conceive is of no easie solution to those who maintain the imputation it selfe of this righteousnesse and not the righteousnesse imputed to be the form of justification Which yet I conceive to be an apprehension every whit as rationall as that which on the other hand maintaineth the righteousnesse it selfe of Christ imputed to be this forme For whether we conceive of justification either under the notion of a relation being a new condition come upon the person justified which seems to be the best and truest notion of it or whether we conceive it as a passion besides which two I know no predicament a I nature that can be put upon it certainly no righteousnesse whatsovâ— properly so called much lesse the righteousnesse of another then of the person justified can be the forme of it It is unpossible that one predicament or predicamentall being should informe another and that righteousnesse whether we speake of that which is habituall or that which is actuall belongeth neither to the predicament of relation nor to that of passion is better known to Logicians then to be made matter of disputation The oyle in the cruse doth not yet faile SECT 5 There are some drops still of further reason to exaucthorize the opinion of this imputation If justification consists partly in the imputation of Christs righteousnesse partly in remission of sinnes then must there be a double formall cause of justification and that made up and compounded of two severall natures really differing the one from the other But this is unpossible Ergo. With the rod of this Argument Calvin scourg'd those Fathers of Trent for joyning regeneration or infusion of grace with remission of sins in justification as we heard before which supposing him a man but tolerably sound or sober in his intellectualls is a demonstration in abundance that his meaning never was to place Iustification in any imputation of righteousnesse really distinct from remission of sins but that his apprehensions in this point were praecise et formaliter the same with this Country-mans of latter times who calls Remission of sins that righteousnesse which is imputed (a) Remissio peccatorum est justitia imputata Chamier Panstrat t. 3. l. 21. cap. 19. see 10. Idem sunt justificatio et Remissio peccatorum Vismus Cat. part 2. Qu. 60. sect 3. Whose meaning by the way is not as some of the opposite party in this cause have catch'd and quarrel'd with like expressions from others as if God in justification did imputeremission of sins unto men and in this sence remission of sins should be called the righteousnesse which is imputed but that God really remitting and forgiving mens sinnes such remission and forgivenesse may well be called an imputed righteousnes partly because it is no absolute legall or text righteousnesse but a righteousnesse by interpretation or construction of favour partly because such a righteousnesse as it is it is notwithstanding given in the strength and mediation of the righteousnesse merit and satisfaction of another which is Christ Let us yet heare and not be wearie what both reason and Religion can further speake against this imputation so much spoken for SECT 6 If such imputation be necessary in justification Argum. 20 this necessity must be found either in respect of the justice of God because otherwise he could not be just in pronouncing men righteous or in respect of his mercie or for the salving or advanceing of some other Attribute c. But there is no necessity of bringing in such an imputation into justification in respect of any of these Therfore it is brought in without any necessity at all and consequently must of necessity be cast out againe The Protectors of it themselves assigne no other necessity of it but onely in respect of Gods justice God they say cannot salvâ justiciâ with the safety of his justice pronounce a man righteous that is not righteous their meaning is according to the strict and literall righteousnesse of the Law But to this I answere First that there is nothing at all necessarie to be done either by God himselfe or by man about the justification of a sinner by way of satisfaction to the Justice of God since that one offering of Christ of himselfe upon the crosse Otherwise there must be found somwhat defective or wanting in that satisfaction If the justice of God be fully and every waies satisfied and provided for by the death of Christ as concerning the Iustification of sinners doubtlesse there remaines nothing further as necessarie to be done either by God or by man or by any other creature for the satisfaction of the same Justice Therfore if God should impute the righteousnesse of Christ unto men in this case some other end or pretext for it must be sought out not any provision for or satisfaction to his justice The infinite valour of Christs passives must not be abated or drawn down to make way for an imaginatie exaltation of his actives The necessity of Faith to Iustification which is a necessity confessed and acknowledged by all â—â—yâ—th not in reference to Gods Justice as if any man satisfied that either in whoâ—e or in part by beleeving but the necessity of it respecteth either his wisdome or the counsaile of his will as the Apostles expression is Eph. 1.11 He judged it not meet not counted it unjust to save men in any other way by the satisfaction of Christ then by the way of Faith This is the WILL of him that sent me saith our Saviour Ioh 6.40 not the righteousnes or Iustice of him that sent me that every man which seeth the Sonne and beleeveth in him should have everlasting life If there were nothing else to hâ—nder but want of satisfaction to divine iustice doubtlesse the whole world should be saved Vehemens in Deâ— est ad homini benefaciendum affectus quem eousque puratus est extendere quâ—â—â—l IVSTICIA vlle modo permittit Corvin Cersur Anatom p. 79. without any more adoe And therfore by the way that saying of Arnoldus in his Censure of Molineus p. 79. is deeply taxable except he can best â—â—e himselfe to make an aâ—tonemâ—nt for the hardnesse of his text with a soft interpretation There is saith he a strong affection in God to doe good to man and this affection he is still ready to act or exercise as far as ever his justice will give him leave Secondly whereas it was sayd that God cannot SECT 7 with the safety of his justice or truth pronounce a man righteous that is not so indeed with a legall righteousnesse litterally and properly so called I answere that doubtlesse he may aswell and as truely pronounce and cal that man righteous that
formally sinners before God if this I say be the meaning of the terme Imputation when it is applyed to Adams sin Transeat let it passe But if the meaning be Adams sin is imputed to his posteritie i. that sinfull act wherein Adam transgressed when heate the forbidden fruit is in the letter and formalitie of it and as it was Adams owne personall sinne imputed to his posteritie so that by this imputation all his posterity are made formally sinners before any part of the punishment of that siâ—ne comes upon them this is an imputation which I am certaine the Scripture wil never justifie neither in the letter of it nor in the spirit of it yea and reason it selfe riseth up against it with a high hand The equitie on Gods part for the involving of Adams posteritie SECT 8 in the punishment due to his first sinne for I do not conceive it to be an act either of district and essentiall justice in God or yet of absolute or pure prerogative but a certaine mixt act betweene both seemeth to be founded upon 3 things Sine dubio potuit Deus si sic ei visum fuisset Adae peccatum aut ipsi condonare aut in ipso tantum ulcisci posterisque omnibus gratiam salutarem co neutiquam obstante liberare gratificari Dr. Twist and yet none of them the act of Adams sinne nor yet the imputation of it But 1º the demerit or sinfullnesse of the sinne which is a thing much differing from the act of it the act of it being principally from God him elfe and that by way of efficiencie properly so called as all Divines unanimously agree but the sinfulnesse of it wholly from the creature Secondly the streightnesse or narrownesse or scantnesse of Adams person Thirdly and lastly that speciall and neere relation that his posterity had to his person From the posture I conceive or standing up of these or the like circumstances before God may be demonstrated the equitie of his proceedings in involving or binding over aswell Adams posterity as his person in and to the same condemnation and punishment with him for his first sinne First for the fullnesse and weight of the demerit or sinfulnesse of it it is almost unconceiveable of what aggravations it is capable of if all those circumstances and considerations were but made to speake home which are able to charge it in this kind Some we touched towards the begining of this Chapter and many others there are which I do not purpose now to insist upon because the sinfullnesse of this sin is generally confessed and acknowledged by all though it be true also there are some circumstances on the other hand which doe much case and lighten the provocation and offensiâ—â—nesse of it as we shall have occasion to shew hereafter in the second part Onely I desire to mention one thing SECT 9 which to my best remembrance I have not often met with under observation in this kind though it be a consideration obvious and neere at hand The sinne of Adam hath this peculiar streyne or burden of sinfulnesse in it wherein it justifieth the sinne even of the reprobate Angells themselves being in that respect a sinne more intolerable then theirs These wicked Angells were entrusted but with their owne portions respectively and therefore what they sinned they sin'd to themselves they sin'd away ruin'd only their personall estates in blessedness But Adam had a deerer and deeper ingagement upon him to keep him upright he had the estates of all his posterity put into his hand and knew that if he sinned and fell he should draw thousands thousands of soules after him into the same perdition with him and those such the things of whose peace safety and welfare the Law of nature it selfe obliged him to provide for with more care and tendernesse then of all other creatures whatsoever being those that were to be his owne naturall children even flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone the ingagement of which relation the Apostle averreth in this respect 2 Cor. 12.14 where he saith that Children ought not to lay up for the Parents but Parents for the Children If it be esteemed a sore brand as well it may upon the wickednesse of Ieroboam that he made Israel to sinne and yet this was no other making to sinne then what possibly might and ought to have bin resisted and withstood by those that were drawne to sinne by it then must it needs be a far soarer charge upon the sinne of Adam who made not Israel onely but the whole world to sinne and that in such a way and by such a making against which there was not the least strength or power in the world to make the least resistance or opposition So then the exceeding sinfulnesse or demerit of this sinne of Adam being granted it cannot be judged any waies unequall in God or repugnant to the rules of justice to inflict an unanswerable measure or weight of punishment upon it Punishment is a kind of payment or recompence for an injury or losse susteyned J paied or restored saith David Psal 69.4 the things that I never tooke i. I went under censure and was punished in my good Name and otherwise for offences whereof I was never guilty The like phrase of restitution by way of punishment you shall finde Iob 20.18 So that now to require or take in punishment valuably to the losse or injury a man hath susteyned hath thus far no appearance of unrighteousnesse in it Therefore 2º SECT 10 consider we further the narrownesse or scantnesse of Adams person of how small receipt or capacitie his vessell was to containe that abundance of wrath or that fulnesse of punishment which God might lawfully require for the great injury or dishonor done unto him in that mighty sin and this will bring you to confesse and acknowledge this further that either God must sit downe by the losse as we use to say and want meanes of coming againe into his owne or else he must looke out beyond Adams person for more to be joyned in the punishment with him to supplie as it were that was wanting in him in that respect In civill and politique States it is not more usuall then equall and reasonable that when the offence is of a very high nature as in the case of Treason and the like c. the punishment should not be confin'd to the person of the offender which how great soever is ever lesse then an offence of that nature but be further extended untill the qualitie of the offence be somewaies answered Vpon this ground of equitie I conceive it was that God would not be satisfied with the personall destruction though in a way of extraordinary judgement of Korah Dathan and Abiram their sin of rebellion against Moses and Aaron riseing to a greater height then so but involved their Families their wives their Sons their little ones yea their Tents and all their goods in the punishment with
loose and false and deservedly so esteemed by all men notwithstanding her union and communion with an husband of upright affections neither doth the union and communion which the rest of the members of the body have with the head necessarily require that whatsoever the Head hath or doth should be imputed to all the members respectively The eyes which are in the head are not imputed to the hands or feete nor the eares which grow upon the head imputed to the heeles nor the actions or naturall functions of seeing and hearing the one performed by the eyes the other by the eares imputed to the armes or legges so that these should be said either to see or to heare as they doe In like manner there is not the least shew or colour of pretence to build a necessity of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to beleevers upon that union and communion which they have with him or to conclude and inferre that because beleevers have union and communion with Christ therefore his righteousnesse must be theirs in such a sence that they may have the denomination of righteous therefrom or be constituted and made righteous therewith May it not be said with as much reason that because beleevers have union and communion with Christ therefore his soule and his body must needs be imputed to them yea and his wisedome and his power and his glory imputed to them also so that they are esteemed by God as wise as powerfull as glorious by vertue of such imputation as Christ himselfe is That union and communion which beleevers have with Christ SECT 10 are sufficiently yea abundantly salved and made good in these and such like particulars 1. By vertue of this union and communion with him they are actuall members of that mysticall and blessed body or society whereof he is the head 2. They are partakers of the same spirit with him who dwelleth in them as he dwelleth in Christ himself 3. They have communion fellowship in the same fruits and effects of the Spirit with him 4. By vertue of this union and communion with him they have part and fellowship in that Redemption which he hath purchased with his blood 5. They have speciall interest in that infinite wisedome and power of his as in all other perfections and excellent endowments of his person whereby he is both every wayes able and alwayes ready and willing to doe marvellously for them and to advance the things of their peace 6. they have a compleate right and title to that immortall and undefiled inheritance which is reserved in the heavens 7. They have communion and fellowship with God himselfe and speciall interest in his love 8. And lastly they have communion and fellowship one with another and are dearely and deepely interessed in the mutuall affections one of another besides many other rich priviledges of like nature and of very precious concernment So that to deny the imputation of Christs righteousnes is no more to deny or any wayes to obscure their union communion with Christ than to deny that the miracles which Christ wrought are imputed to us or than to deny that a man seeth with his hands or healeth with his heeles is a denying that the members of the body have any connexion union or communion with the head The sinne in of Adam is no where in Scripture said to be imputed to his posterity Conclusi 9 SECT 11 neither can any other imputation thereof be proved either by Scripture or sound reason than that which stands either in a communion of all his posteritie with him therin the second Adam only excepted who for divers reasons was an exempt person or els in a propagation of his nature defiled therewith or lastly in that punishment or condemnation that is come upon the world by it But as for any such imputation of it by vertue whereof precisely considered and simply as an act of Gods justice all his posterity should be constituted and made formally sinners neither doe the Scriptures acknowledge nor sound reason admit The former clause of this Conclusion is unquestionable The Scriptures wheresoever they speake of Adams sin and the relation of it to his posterity wholly abstaine from the terme of imputation neither doe they use any other word or phrase in this Argument of like signification and importance with it at least in that notion and sence wherein it is so frequently used by many in this controversie But first they acknowledge a communion betweene Adam and his posterity except the before excepted in this sin in respect whereof the sinne may as well be attributed to any and to all of his posterity as to Adam himselfe as Abrahams act of paying tythes to Melchizedeth is ascribed to Levie being in his loynes as well as to Abraham himselfe And to say as the thing is saith the Holy Ghost Heb. 7.9 Levie also which receiveth tythes paied tythes in Abraham The truth and propriety of which saying he makes good by this demonstration in the next words For he was yet in the loynes of his Father Abraham when Melchizedech met him It is not here said that Abrahams paying tythes was imputed to Levie but that Levie himselfe payed tythes in that act of Abrahams as well as Abraham So that this act of paying tythes was as well Levies act as Abrahams and is imputed to him not as Abrahams act but as his owne In like manner the Scripture plainely affirmeth that all Adams posterity sinn'd in Adam in that first sinne of his especially Rom. 5.12 but it no where affirmeth that Adams sinne is imputed to them Their owne sinne in Adam may with good propriety of speech and safety of truth be said to be imputed to them but that Adams sinne otherwise than as it is or was theirs as well as his by reason of that subsistance and being they had in him or in his loynes should be imputed to them hath neither ground in Scripture nor consistence either with reason or truth That old rule in Metaphysiques SECT 12 Operatio rei consequitur esse rei i. the Acts or operations of things still follow the being of things and are proportionable and suteable thereunto is sound and rationall and of perfect agreement with that Scripture Reason cited from Heb. 7.10 There are severall kinds of beings and subsistences of things A thing may have its being either in causis or extra causas i. either in the causes of it onely or out of the causes viz. when it is actually produced and in a compleate being Againe those things that have their beings onely in their causes may have their being either in their supernaturall causes onely as the counsell purpose and power of God or in the naturall causes also that is when such things have an actuall and compleate being which according to the common course of nature and providence are able and apt to produce them Thus in Winter the Rose may be said to have a being in the roote
of that shrubbe that is apt to beare it in Summer the naturall season for such births Thus Levie as we heard is said to have beene i. to have had a being in the loynes of Abraham And this all mankinde even Adams whole posterity had a being and subsistence in Adam Now there are none of these kinds of beings and subsistences of things but have their acts and operations proportionable and proper to them the perfecter being the perfecter and lesse dependent operation Things that have an actuall and compleate being out of their causes act and worke of themselves their causes that produced them as such having no communion or fellowship with them in their actions Things that have their beings onely in their causes act and operate in and by and with these onely as having their whole dependence on them and subsistence in them yet are these acts and operations of things in their causes onely as truely theirs though not as perfectly and compleately theirs as they are the causes themselves in and by whom they were performed Thus Levie did as truely pay tythes in Abraham as Abraham himselfe did in whom he paied them otherwise wee make the Scripture lesse true in affirming the one then the other So that act of eating the forbidden fruit by Adam was as truely the act of all his posterity as his owne though not so compleately and perfectly theirs as his hee having no dependance on them or subsistence in any of them therein but they all depending on him as one in and by whom God had given them all their beings and having their subsistence in him as the naturall productive roote of all their actuall compleate beings a The Fathers generally have taught this inexistence or being of all men in Adam Fuit Adam in illo perierunt omnes Amb. in Luc. lib. 7. Adam erat nos omnes omnes eramus ille unus Adam Certum manifestumque est alia esse propria cuique peccata in quibus hi tantum peccant quorum peccata sunt aliud hoc unum in quo omnes peccaverunt quando omnes ille unus homo suerunt Aug. de Peccat Merit Remis l. 1. c. 10. In Adamo omnes peccavimus ib. c. 13. Si parvuli quod vera fides habet nasiuntur peccatoreâ— profecto eo modo quo sunt peccatores etiam pravaticatores legis illius quae in Paradise lata est agnoscuntur Aug. de Civi l. 16. c. 27. Qui non fuerit regeneratus interibit anima illa de genere ejus quia testamentum meum dissipavit quando in Adam cum omnibus etiam ipse peccavit ib. There being then a certaine and unquestionable truth in this that Adams sinne was the sinne of his posteritie as well as of his person this the Scripture affirmeth and holdeth forth unto us as one maine ground and consideration why and how the world comes to be involved in the guilt and punishment of Adams transgression 2. Adams sinne comes to relate or to have reference to his posteritie in matter of pollution and defilement and consequently of guilt and punishment by naturall descent and propagation from him Adams person the fountaine and spring-head of all his posteritie being corrupted and poysoned with him except God should have wrought miraculously and above the course of nature either by a through purging of the fountaine before any streame issued from it or by dissevering and untwisting as it were the poyson from the waters in the very point and moment of their issue and source neither of which he was any wayes bound to doe could not but send forth streames of like corruption and defilement with the fountaine it selfe This the Scripture plainely teacheth in many places Who can bring a cleane thing out of an uncleane not one Iob 14.4 God himselfe by his ordinary power cannot doe it So our Saviour Ioh. 3.6 That which is borne of the flesh corrupted and weakened by sinne is by the course of nature whereunto God himselfe hath righteously consented flesh i. a creature or thing of the same sinfull and weake nature and condition with it And to forbeare other texts of like importance this way the Apostle Rom. 5.19 expresly affirmeth that by the disobedience of one meaning Adam many were made sinners not by the imputation of the Act of his sinne to them this is neither Sunne nor Moone neither Scripture nor good Reason but by corrupting and defiling his owne person by reason whereof all that are borne of him in a way of naturall dissent and propagation must needs be borne sinners 3. And lastly death and condemnation are justly come upon the world no so much to speake properly and with the Scriptures for Adams transgression as by Adams transgression partly as this transgression of his was the sinne and transgression of the world as hath beene already said and proved partly as by meanes of this sin the world I meane all the sonnes and daughters of men that are borne into it are become personally and so compleately sinfull In this sence it is said that by the offence of one death reigned viz. over all by one Rom. 5.17 and so that death passed over all in that all had sinned ver 12. And againe that judgement came by one unto condemnation ver 16. And that all men by nature are children of wrath c. Ephes 23. If men can find any propriety in the word Imputation to signifie any of these three Considerations let the sinne of Adam be said to be imputed to his posterity I shall no wayes contradict it but for any such imputation as is pretended and pressed by many by which men should be constituted and made formally sinners before God and the sinne no wayes looked upon as theirs but onely by meanes of such imputation I neither finde the Scriptures affirming nor am otherwise able to comprehend Though justification and salvation came unto the world by Christ the second Adam Concusi 10 sect 14 as condemnation and death came by the first Adam yet are there many different considerations and circumstances betweene the comming and bringing in of salvation by the one and of condemnation by the other The Apostle himselfe gives instance in two particulars wherein they differ greatly Rom. 5.15.16 And besides these there are many others As first the sinne of Adam by which he brought condemnation upon the world was as well the act of all his posteritie as his owne in which respect they may as truely be said to have brought condemnation upon themselves as Adam but that obedience by which Christ brought salvation into the world can with no propriety of speech nor with any consistence of truth be said to have beene theirs or performed by them who are saved by it so that these cannot now be said with any more truth to have saved themselves then if they had not beene saved at all It is said indeede that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himselfe 2 Cor.
i. the Author and procurer of all these respectively Sixtly by a metonymy of the cause for the effect or of the antecedent for the consequent a common dialect also in Scriptures aswell the benefits and rewards of a mans righteousnesse in the first and third acception of the word as the blessings and privileges which accompany that righteousnesse which we have by the merits of Christ in our Iustification are sometimes expressed by the terme righteousnesse Thus Iob 33.26 God will render unto man his righteousnesse i. will recompence and reward every mans uprightnesse and integrity with sutable blessings and expressions of his love So Psal 112.9 His righteousnesse remaineth for ever i. the praise and other rewards of his righteousnesse shall be durable and lasting So Gal. 5.5 We through the Spirit waite for the hope of the righteousnesse of Faith i. for the great and royall privileges promised by God and accordingly hoped for by us to that Iustification which is by Faith in Iesus Christ See the first Chapter of the former part of this discourse Sect. 4. p. 12. c. Seventhly the word righteousnesse in some construction of words with it hath no precise or proper signification distinct and apart from the word with which it is joyned but together with that word makes a sense or signification of one and the same thing Thus in the phrase of imputing righteousnesse Rom. 4.6.11 c. the word imputing See impedit ira c. p. 43. doth not signifie one thing and righteousnesse another but together they signifie one and the same act of God which we call free iustifying So that to impute righteousnesse is nothing else but freely to iustifie and righteousnesse imputed free iustification passive It is thâ—â— in many idio m's and proprieties of languages In that Hebrew phrase of covering the feet Iudg. 3.24 1 Sam. 24.3 Neither of the words are to be taken in any proper or peculiar signification but together they signifie one and the same thing and that differing from the proper signification of either of the words Many other instances might be given in severall phrases or formes of speech the true sense and meaning whereof is not to be gathered from the proper signification which the words have severally in other constructions but from the concurrence and joynt aspect of them in that phrase Thus the Scripture phrase of going in to a woman is not to be interpreted according to the significations of the words in other sentences or constructions of speech but according to the importance which they still joyntly have when they are found together Eightly and lastly the word righteousnesse according to the propriety of the Hebrew stongue which often useth abstracts for concretes signifieth sometimes a Society or company of righteous or iustifiedones sometimes of just or upright ones In the former sense you have it 2 Cor. 5.21 That we should be made the righteousnesse of God in him i. a company of righteous or iustified persons made such by God through Iesus Christ In the latter sense you have it Esa 60.17 where God promiseth to his Church and people to make their exactors righteousnesse i. a generation or company of men that should deale righteously and fairely with them In this dialect of speech poverty for so it is in the originall is put for a company of poore men 2 Kings 24.14 So Captivity for a company of Captives 2 Chr. 28.5 Deut. 21.10 and in sundry other places So againe circumcision for circumcised Phil. 3.3 election for elected Rom. 11.7 with the like So that aswell in studying as arguing the Question in hand great care must be had that we be not intangled and lose our selves in this multiplicitie of significations of this word righteousnesse which is a word almost of continuall use and occurrence in the businesse of Iustification and yet of such an ambiguous and different signification and importance Distincti 3 See sect 4. See Pareus De Iusti Christi Active et Passive p. 180. D. Prideaux Lect. 5. de Iustifi p. 162. Mr. Eradshaw Iustifica p. 68 69. c. Mr. Forbez Iustificate 25. p. 111 112 c that without much heedfulnesse it may occasion much stumbling and miscariage in our understanding The righteousnesse or obedience of Christ is twofold oâ— of two kindes the one Divines call Iustitia personae the righteousnesse of his person the other Iustitia meriti the righteousnesse of his merit The terms of Active and Passive wherein this Distinction is commonly conceived are not altogether so proper because even in that obedience which we call Passive Christ was in some sort active as willingly and freely submitting himselfe unto it Notwithstanding the Distinction might passe well enough in these termes Obedientia Christi duplex â—st altera quam vi legus communu qua creatura rationalus verus homo cum esset altera quam vi legude mediatione peculiarus sive pacti de redemptionis negotio initi quam neris humani Mediator et Redemptor Dro Patri debuâ—t et exhibuit Gataker against Gomarus p. 4. See further p. 15. 〈◊〉 p. 25. ibid. The righteousnesse of his person is that whereby he iustifyeth himselfe only or is himselfe righteous the righteonsnesse of his merit is that whereby he iustifyeth others The former consisteth partly of that integrity of nature which was in him partly of that obedience which he performed to the morall Law or that Law which is generally imposed upon all men The latter of that obedience or subjection which he performed to that peculiar Law of Mediator-ship which was imposed upon him alone and never upon any man besides For it is evident that Christ both did and suffered many things not simply as he was man but as he was Mediator especially his voluntary submission of himselfe unto death for the ransome and attonement of the world was the fulfilling of the great commandement in the peculiar Law of Mediator-ship being no waies bound by any precept in the Morall Law thereunto If Christ had been bound as man or by the Morall Law to die for the sinnes of men his death had bin ineffectuall for others For certaine it is that no man dischargeth another mans debt Qui obedientiae activae aut sanctitati nativae meritum justitla ascribunt morrem Christi sine dubie innnem reddunt Pareus De Iustic Christi Activ and Pass p. 181.182 c. by paying his owne and our Saviour himselfe injoyneth his Disciples when they should doe only that which was commanded them though they should do this to the uttermost yet to say that they were unprofitable Servants they had done but that which was their duty to doe Luk 17.10 Besides hee that maintaineth that Christ was bound by the moral Law to die for the sinnes of men saith in effect that if he had not died he had bin a sinner and deserved to have bin punished himselfe and so extenuateth and abaseth to the dust the
the third and last sense the severall parts of whitenesse that are in the wall as the whitenesse that is above and the whitenesse that is beneath that which is on the right hand and that which is on the left with that which is in the midst are the matter of that area or whole extent of whitenesse which is in the wall In this sense the three lines whereof a triangle is made is said to be the matter of the triangle and letters and syllables to be the matter of a word and words the matter of a sentence c. But there is no accident whatsoever that hath any matter properly so called nor any actioÌ„ any other matter properly or unproperly or however called but only the subject matter or object on which it is acted and wherein it is terminated and received What hath been said concerning this materiall cause is dilligently to be remembred and carried along with us to the businesse of Justification because it much concern's one veyne of the Question or controversie depending The fourth and last head of causes SECT 8 was that which is called the Forme or formall cause of a thing This cause is divided or distinguished into that which is properly and that which is improperly so called The forme properly so called is that cause which together with the matter properly so called constitutes and makes up a substantiall compounded body This kinde of forme is alwaies it selfe a substance and not an accident and still the more noble or principall part of that body which it informeth The particular species of it are not knowne but onely by the properties and operations which flow from them respectively The forme or formall cause of a thing unproperly so called which is that kinde of forme wherewith only we have to doe in the businesse of Iustification is allwaies a thing of that inferior nature or being which we call accidentall or adjunctive Because it is still susteyned in ir's being in some other nature which is substantiall and hath no subsistence in or by it selfe yet hath not this forme the denomination of a forme alwaies in regard of the subject wherein it hath it's being and to which it gives a kinde of being also as learning gives a man his being learned c. but in regard of that action or motion whereby it is introduced into the subject and is therefore called the forme of an action motion or alteration not because it gives any other kinde of being to any of these for it rather receives it's being from them but only a being knowne and distinguished from all other actions or motions whatsoever For actions or motions as calefaction frigefaction and so Redemption Iustification salvation c. are severally knowne and distinguished one from another and so from every other action or motion whatsoever besides by that proper forme impression or alteration which they introduce and make in their subjects or objects about which they are exercised and acted respectively as the heat or warmth which is caused in my hand by the fire maketh that action of the fire by which it is caused not simply to be but to be known to be that action which we call calefaction or warming and none other iâ— beiâ—g unpossible that such a forme or impressiâ—n as heate is should be introduced into any subject but by such an action as calefaction or warming is In this case the heate which is caused in my hand may be called the forme of calefaction not because it gives a being unto it which is the proper notion and consideration of a forme but rather because it receives it's being from it and so gives it a manifestation or distinction from other actions which is one property of a forme properly so called according to the knowne maxime in Logique which teacheth us that the forme includes or presupposeth 3 things 1º the being of a thing 2º the distinction of it 3º the operation of it (a) Posita forma tria ponuntur 1 esse res 2 distinctio rei 3 operatio rei And doubtlesse the terme or notion of a forme can in no other respect or at least in none so proper be ascribed unto actions or motions as in this viz. because those qualities impressions alterations relations c. which they cause and produce in their subjects have this analogie or proportion with formes properly so called that they give distinction unto them as these do to those things or natures which they informe though in another respect they be opposite to them as hath bin said formes properly called still giving a being to the things whereof they are formes whereas these formes appropriated to actions alwaies receive their beings from them So then to aske or inquire concerning the forme of any action as Iustification Redemption or the like what it is is but to aske what is the name nature property or condition of that effect impression or alteration which is immediately and precisely caused and produced by it in that subject matter whether person or thing whereon it is acted Thus to aske what is the forme of that action which we call frigefaction or cold-making is but to aske what the name and nature of that impression or alteration is which is caused thereby in that subject whereon it worketh And that happily may be one maine reason of the difficulty which is apprehended and of the intricatenesse and confusion that are found amongst many writers touching the forme of Iustification because the formes of Actions are seldome made matter of Question or inquirie either in Philosophie or Divinity or in any other Art or Science as farre as my weake learning and memory have taken notice neither do I remember for the present any Question on foote at this day touching either the matter or especially the forme of any action but only this of Iustification Nor have I met with any which do so much as plainely perspicuously and distinctly declare and explicate what they meane by this forme of Iustification whereby it may I conceive easily come to passe that Authors may be at a losse one of another and scarce one of many cleerely understand the minde and meaning either of his fellow or his opposite in this point Having with what convenient brevity we could SECT 9 discoursed and layd downe the number nature and kinds of causes so farre as I conceived the knowledge and consideration of them necessary to a distinct explication and understanding of the Doctrine of IustificatioÌ„ as it lies in the veines of the Scriptures Come we now roundly and cheerefully on to draw up the Doctrine it selfe according to the direction and importance of what hath bin delivered herein I begin with the efficient causes of Iustification which are many and those of very different consideration Haply it will not be necessary if possible to insist upon all that stand in this relation of causalitie unto it The Principall naturall efficient cause according 〈◊〉 the