is no spot in thee The meaning is she was so in an Evangelical but not in a Legal sense sincerity or true grace was the prevailing Principle and in that respect he accounted her for his Merits all fair and without spot When Christ said concerning Nathaniel an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile he intended no more but an upright sincere Soul Christ such is his love he denominates his People from the better part If therefore his meaning be that God seeth no Sin in his People so far as they are sincerely conformed to the Gospel Law this Conformity in it self being no Sin but a Righteousness or that God seeth no Sin which he hath fully pardoned to be unpardoned or that God doth not so see Sin as everlastingly to condemn a true Believer for it in denying him Repentance Faith Pardon through the merits of Christ I am of his mind But then if he intended which I suppose he doth that God seeth no Sin in his People as they are accounted personally righteous for their Justification with Christ's Righteousness that there is any such thing as this I deny and therefore there cannot be the other upon that account or for that The rest of his Texts are not to the purpose 25. I believe saith he that such an one still naming me ought to let Men state their own judgments and give their own sense of what they say and hold and not state the same for them and draw his own absurd consequences and fight with them against he knows not who This is a pretty Article of a Man's Faith in the point of Justification but I must say something unto it Well then either this Man's judgment if he know what he holds himself doth upon the matter in question contradict what I affirm or it doth not If it do not why doth he oppose me If it do why doth he complain as though I did him wrong And when he talks of drawing absurd consequences â—tis well if he know what an absurdity is although he himself be guilty enough in this kind in what he hath writ But let him find me if he can that any of the consequences of which he speaks do contradict the Doctrine I draw them from and if he disown the Doctrine and hold the contrary I charge not the consequences upon him But then he must first retract that which he makes an Article of his Creed i. e. that Christ's acts works doings and obedience in themselves for that he must mean or elâ—â— he contradicts not me are imputed and counted to the Elect for their personal justifying Righteousness But he faith further I sight with my consequences against I do not know who If I do not it is like he doth or else why should he take himself concerned to oppose unless he hath a mind to kick before he be prick'd But he goes on and tells us he believes that I am guilty of the breach of the 9th Command in bearing false witness But let me tell him here if he were no more guilty upon the matter in Question of false Accusation against me than I am against him or others upon the point I should have been ashamed to have said thus much by him I desire him then to consider if he be not very guilty of that which he chargeth me with while he insinuaâ—es 1. That I hold that some of the Elect being Adult shall live and die Insidels 2. That I in the point of Justification am one with the Papists Arminians Socinians and Quakers 3. That I contradict the 11th 13th and 17th Articles of the Church of England 4. That my consequences are absurd with relation to the Doctrine they are dedâ—ced from 5. That I am guilty of the breach of the 9th Command in applying that Doctrine to any when plain it is it hath been held and still is by many that Christ is one Legal Person with the Elect and that Christ obeyed and suffered in the account of the violated Law not only as a Mediatour but as a common publick Person representing all the Elect and this he saith himself in what he did and suffered so as by the same Law what he did for us is reckoned or imputed to us as if we our selves had done it and what was done to him tending to our Justification and Salvation is reckoned as done to us And doth not this agree with the Doctrine I draw the consequences from 6. That I affirm Faith to justice as an act without relation to its object Christ with others I might mention none of which he can prove against me and who is it that beareth false witness now I or he But he hath more yet quoth he speaking after a scornful sort concerning me he matters not that he means the breach of the Ninth Command being now got under a new Law which will be more favourable than the old This new Law he scoffs at I have shewn is the Gospel or Covenant of Grace and have proved above that there is such a thing and that it is a Law and that Christ hath purchased it though the Socinians deny it and so he with them And therefore I must make bold to tell this Man and that not without warrant from the Holy Scriptures that he must either be brought under this new Law which he derides or he perisheth for ever for if he think to be justified and saved upon the terms of the Old Covenant he will find himself wretchedly mistaken Galat. 3. 10. For as many as are of the works of the Law are under the curse for it it written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to â—o them 2 Theâ— 1. 7 8. And to you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming Fire taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ And let him not think that the Gospel Law or the Gospel which is a Law giveth liberty to Sin or exempts from a due and sincere Obedience to all God's Holy Commands for the contrary is plain Tâ—us 2. 11 12. For the grace of God that bringeth Salvation hath appeared to all Men Teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly righteously and godly in this present World But if he look for no favour from God but in the way and upon the terms of the Law of Innocency he never shall have any nay he never would have had any so much as common 26. I believe saith he that that Righteousness wherewith God justifies the Elect is a Righteousness which his Holy Law approves and accepts of Though he make no distinction yet by Righteousness I take it for granted he intends the Righteousness of Christ and by Law the Law of Innocent Nature violated by Man's Sin This then is that which he must intend i.
as they are Men and if so then they must prove the Person is justified but not the Man or the Person is formally righteous with Christ's righteousness but not the Man how this will be performed if the proof of it be undertaken I cannot tell But before I pass this I further urge if Christ's righteousness be the righteousness of our Nature which it must be if it be our formal personal righteousness then it must be a quality inhering and if it be a quality inhering then we are made the Subjects and so we must have that which is proper unto and inseparable from such a Subject i. e. Christ removed and existing seperate from its own proper Subject in this and the other Believer which cannot be the Subjects thereof no more than Christ's Body can be the Subject of the accidents of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper Alas alas that Men should be accounting the Popish Transubstantiation such a Monster and yet cannot nor will not see what they themselves are forming And upon the matter I would desire it might be considered whether there be any such thing as a personal justifying righteousness the matter of which is not inherent But it may be further objected if Faith be our formal personal justifying righteousness is not the difference betwixt Justification and Sanctification hereby taken away and so these two great priviledge which in Scripture are spoken of as really distinct confounded and jumbled into one By what hath been said above the Objectors if they will but consider are strangely intanged in the briers of this Objection themselves asserting Christ's righteousness to be their formal personal righteousness and so the righteousness of their Natures and so make the sanctifying Grace of the Spirit of no use But however for Answer to the Objection I shall I hope make it appear that although I affirm that Faith is our personal justifying Gospel Righteousness and also own it to be a sanctifying Grace that Justification and Sanctification are yet distinct and by this Doctrine not conâ—ounded but still keep the difference assigned unto them by God in his Word Faith then as sanctifying is that which purifies the Heart Acts 15 9. it is a renewing by the Spirit of the moral Image of God consisting in Knowledge Righteousness and Holiness Coloss 3. 10. Ephes 4. 24. so that the Soul which was only carnally disposed and inclined before is having Spiritual Illumination disposed and inclined principally to embrace Spiritual Objects and here we consider Faith absolutely as a change of the Nature Faith as justifying gives a right to Christ and for his Merits sake to Pardon and Life by virtue of God's gracious appointment in his Covenant of Grace in his Imputation of it to give this right and here I consider Faith relatively as a change of the state i. e. the Sinner that before was a Child of Wrath and an Heir of Hell upon a sincere Faith hath that relation changed and is accounted by God for Christ's Righteousness his Child by Adoption and an Heir of Heaven and Eternal Life John 1. 12. Galat. 3. 26. Faith as sanctifying relates to Christ as Physitian healing by his Spirit of Grace the sinful distempered Soul Faith as justifying relates to Christ as Rector and Judge who by his Law of Grace hereuâ—â—â— doth declare that Soul who was as a Criminal was condemned in Law before now to be pardoned and to have right to everlasting Life There is as much difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies and as it Justifies as betwixt an healing Medicine and a Title and Right in Law to Pardon and an Inheritance So that as the same Person may have divers Offices and may be distinguished according to his Offices so is the same Faith distinguished as sanctifying and justifying The same Man may be both a Physitian and a Judge Now will any Man that is right in his Head say that the administring of Physick and the dispensing and executing of Law are both one because both performed by the same Person Those who accuse me and others of confounding Justification and Sanctification when we say that Faith is our personal justifying Righteousness according to God's gracious Constitution or Law they themselves say that Faith doth not only Sanctifie but that it is the Instrument of Justification Now give me leave upon the Point to ask these Men whether they themselves do not make a difference betwixt Faith as it Sanctifies and as it is an Instrument of Justification if they say yea they do do not they then themselves according to their own notion distinguish of the same Faith as sanctifying and as justifying in their Sense and seeing they will not call this a confounding of Justification and Sanctification What reason have they to call our Notion so when we consider Faith as absolute in Sanctification and relative in Justification as hath been cleared If this be so then it may be said Sanctification must be before Justification I Answer They that make the Objection say this as much as we in case they will have Faith to be the Instrument of Justification for surely Faith must be had before it can be an Instrument unless they can prove a Man may use Hands that hath none But however since this is cast in our way we shall a little essay to cleaâ—â— If we take Sanctification then for the very first Seeds of Grace which in their own Nature have a virtue to dispose and incline the Soul to a thankful acceptance of Christ so that the real consent of the Will is gained thus Sanctification is before Justification But if we take it for a more fixed and rooted habit of Grace so it is after Justification The Heart must be first disposed and inclined to open to Christ that so he may have it for his habitation before it will actually open Hence so soon as ever the Soul upon this disposition doth give its consent to accept of the Lord Jesus to be its only Propitiation Head and Teacher the Sinner hath interest in him and by virtue of the Gospel promise hath an actual right unto the blessed benefits of Pardon and Life purchased by him 'T is said of Lydia the Lord opened her Heart and so Revel 3. 20. But it may be said are not the first Seeds of Grace saving I Answer The Seeds of Grace considered as such they have an healing or saving virtue in their own Nature but they are not actually healing or saving to me until they prevail against the corrupt sinful disposition and inclination of my Will I know in what Soul so ever God Sows the Seeds of true Grace those Seeds shall prove healing and saving through Christ they shall prevail against the sinful corrupt disposition of the Will 1 Peter 1. 23. but they are not thus healing and saving to any Soul until they do so Such a Medicine appointed for the recovering of Health it hath an healing quality but though it be taken 't
will have Christ's Righteousness brought in here then we must read the words thus Abraham believed God and God was counted unto him Christ's Righteousness for Righteousness I would desire them to tell us what Sense they can make of either reading So Verse 5th But to him that worketh not but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness And Verse 9th For we say that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness The Scripture saith expresly Faith was counted and Faith was reckoned for Righteousness they say nay but by Faith is meant Christ's Righteousness now let any Man judge whether we are to believe the Scripture or them Though let it ever be marked when I according to Scripture say Faith is counted imputed or reckoned for Righteousness I do not as I have said exclude the object Christ or God in Christ but say it is not Christ's Righteousness in it self that is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness but that Faith which doth accept of the Lord Jesus as offered in the Gospel this Faith gives me interest in him and right to Pardon and Life and as such is my justifying righteousness in the Sense of the Gospel and that because God by the Gospel doth declare unto me and assure me that if I thus believe in Christ I shall both be pardoned and everlastingly saved I must still urge that Text John 3. 16. For God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting Life and let it I pray be well considered for what can God's declaring and assuring by the Gospel be that I shall have these great benefits upon such a Faith but his justifying me thereupon or his accounting by this his express word my right to these blessings upon such a believing But it will be said do you not bring Faith into the very matter of Justification I Answer I shall distinguish of matter of right 1. There is the meriting purchasing matter of right and this is solely or only Christ's Righteousness 2. There is the qualifying matter of right and this is Evangelical Obedience included in Faith seeing that without Faith it is impossible to please God now if Persons judge when I say Evangelical obedience is the matter of right that I intend the purchasing meriting matter of right here they mistake me But if they judge when I affirm Evangelical Obedience to be the matter of right that I only intend the qualifying matter in this they bit right As thus now Persons will grant me there are such gracious benefits as these i. e. Pardon Reconciliation Adoption Acceptation of the services of a real Christian c. The purchasing and meriting Righteousness then of all these benefits is only the righteousness of Christ But now consider me or any other Person as an Impenitent Infidel the Question will be whether as such an one I have an actual personal right unto or interest in these blessings I think it will not be said as such an one I have for then I should be in a saving state while in a state of Impenitency and Infideliâ—y which is manifestly repugnant to the Scripture If not then I must be a Person or Subject qualified with something that according to God's appointment must give me interest in and right unto I mean an actual right unto these benefits which I had not while an Impenitent Infidel And what must this be not the Righteousness of Christ for that cannot be a qualification in me and if not then Faith and Repentance by which of an impenitent Infidel I come to be a penitent Believer And this I would have observed that those which are against my notion yet if they be true practical Christians their practice must and doth agree with my notion To instance in one thing I offer up Prayer and Supplication to God they do the same I know my Prayers will not be accepted in themselves without a Mediatour they know the same I say here I must have right to Christ as my Mediatour by accepting of him and trusting unto him as such and pleading the promises of grace in his Name they say the same I say further I may hope for acceptation of my Prayers for his meritorious intercession if I have the qualification requisite and that is Faith Whatsoever saith Christ you shall ask in my name believing ye shall receive so that this Faith is not the merit of my acceptation but the gracious qualification of my Person without which I cannot have an interest in or right unto in this particular Christ's intercession seeing that is offered up with the Prayers of Saints and these most certainly must be Believers Now are not they of the same mind see then if their practice do not agree with my notion more than their own And it look's odd on 't that Men should contend against that which must be found in their own Practice if they be true Believers Having proceeded thus far my next undertaking shall be to examine a little their gloss upon some of the main Texts they bring for the proof of this their rigid Imputation of Christ's Righteousness 1. One is Psalm 37. 1. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven whose sin is covered Here is the Pardon of Sin express but not a word of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self it is said indeed whose sin is covered But what can the meaning be but that God for the sake of Christ's Merits and Satisfaction so pardons Sin to a Penitent Believer as that it shall never be brought in against him or laid to his charge in judgment to his condemnation and everlasting shame and thus it is said to be covered and thus covered for Christ's Righteousness But seeing that Christ's Righteousness is the cover How is it so in their Sense well they say as a Garment or Robe if it cover then as a Garment or Robe Will they say that properly or that it is really and in it self a Garment or Robe i. e. Physically so surely no for this would be gross to conceive it to be a Coat or Gown c. if not properly a Garment or Robe then improperly they must say it is so and so comparatively in respect of it's use A Robe or Garment then it may have these uses to cover our nakedness to defend from cold and storms to keep our bodies warm and to adorn We will grant then that Christ's Righteousness may be compared to a Robe or Garment in regard of these uses considered as satisfactory and meritorious It is for this that a true penitent Believer having his Sins pardoned shall be delivered from everlasting shame it is for this he shall be secured from the storm of God's eternal wrath and displeasure it is for this he is adorned and beautified with the Graces and Gifts of the most Holy Spirit it is for this that he hath all the
must flee to the Promise and plead the Promise as having a right through Christ upon such qualifications which are of Grace Doth not this speak that the Promise doth both assert our right and also will maintain our right to Pardon and Life And what is it but justifying Saith a Reverend Divine you shall hear a Protestant in his Prayer appealing from the Tribunal of God's Justice to the Throne of his Grace and yet in his Sermon be telling the People that it is nothing else but the perfect Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ imputed to them you must know to be accounted by God as their personal righteousness that saves them which is to bring them back from the Throne of his Grace to the Bar of his Justice to be judged 6. When I say that Justification is God's asserting act by his Promise of Grace our right to Pardon and Life for the sake of Christ upon our believing I do not think that Pardon is any part constituting our Justification but a benefit which doth immediately follow thereupon For consider we Justification first Actively so it consists in God's giving us a right through Christ by his Promise upon our obedience to the preceptive part of the Law of Grace or if you will upon our performance through his Grace of the conditions of the new Covenant I mean such upon which we have a right at the first or at the first an interest or our first acceptance into favour through Christ Ephes 1. 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved Or 2ly Consider we Justification passively so it is our having this right Now observe Pardon is that which God gives right to by his promise and which we have right to considered as subjects qualified i. e. as true penitent Believers and so must be a precious benefit devolved upon us as Persons who have right But seeing that many worthy Divines have affirmed and undertaken taken to prove that our very justifying righteousness consists in Pardon of Sin I shall here give my thoughts and the grounds of them upon the point and shall not impose upon any but leave Persons to take or leave as they shall have light and evidence SECT VII Wherein Pardon and Justification agree and wherein they disagree I Shall then first shew wherein Justification and Pardon agree 1. They agree in the principal Efficient which is God 't is God that Justifies and 't is God that Pardons Rom. 8. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect it is God that justifieth Ephes 4. 32. And be ye kind to one another tender hearted forgiving one another even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you 1 John 1. 9. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness 2. They agree in the Meritorious Cause Christ hath purchased the one and the other it is for his Merits we are Justified and for his Merits we are Pardoned Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 5. 9. Much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him Matth. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins Acts 13. 38. Be it known unto you therefore Men and Brethren that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins 3. They agree in the Subject both Justification and Forgiveness relates to a Penitent Believer and such an one only I speak of the Adult that is Justified and 't is a Penitent Believer and such an one that is Pardoned Acts 10. 43. To him give all the Prophets witness that through his Name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins Acts 3. 19. Repent ye therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. 4. They agree in the Instrumental Cause and that is the Covenant of Grace or God's gracious Promise for this is God's Instrument whereby he doth convey a right to Pardon not only Pardon but a right unto it Isa 43. 25. I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake and will not remember thy sins Isa 44. 22. I have blotted out as a thick cloud thy transgressions and as a cloud thy sins return unto me for I have redeemed thee 5. They agree in time when a Person is Justified he is Pardoned there is no time wherein a Person is Justified but he is Pardoned nor wherein he is Pardoned but he is Justified I proceed Secondly To shew wherein they differ 1. And First They differ as Justification hath the priority of Nature i. e. Justification is in order of Nature before Pardon a Man must in order of Nature have a right to Pardon before he have it he must Repent and Believe and so be conformed to the Gospel Law before he be righteous in the Sense of that Law and so have right to Pardon 2. They differ in their habitude or relation Justification properly relates to a false Accusation Pardon of Sin to a true and just one he that is accused falsly when his Innocency is cleared as to the Crime of which he is accused may be said to be justified Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controversie between Men and they come unto judgment that the judges may judge them then they shall justifie the righteous and condemn the wicked But now he that is truly and justly accused he may have Pardon of the Crime committed but he cannot by that Law whereby he was Convict be justified or accounted as righteous with respect to the Crime of which he hath been truly and justly accused He that is accused of Impenitency and Unbelief if the Accusation be false the Law of Grace accounts him righteous and so justifies him against that Accusation But if a Person accused of Impenitency and Unbelief and the Accusation be true and just this Law will Pardon upon Repentance and Faith through Christ but it will not justifie upon Repentance and Faith as a Person that hath been falsly accused for he was truly and justly accused before he did Repent and Believe though not when he believed 3. They differ in their Essence or Nature that which constitutes Justification is our Conformity to the Law of Grace upon which God in his gracious Promise through Christ accounts us righteous but that which constitutes Pardon is not a Conformity or Obedience of this sort but our acquittance and discharge from obligation to Punishment due true it is upon this Gospel Righteousness for Christ's Satisfaction and Merits we are pardoned but yet Pardon is not nor cannot be that Righteousness which the Gospel calls for to our Justification for if so we should first have forgiveness and then forgiveness upon
a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency is as dung and so abominable to God and sure I am this looks odd on 't for is not this Grace and Holiness a work of God and is not every work of God perfect in its kind hath not a perfection of parts been all along granted and is there not an Evangelical perfection consisting in sincerity which hath been and is acknowledged by Divines was it a strict legal perfection or a perfection consisting in sincerity that David intended when he gave Solomon his Son the charge to serve God with a perfect heart and so when it is said of the People they offered with a perfect heart 1 Chron. 29. 9. Was that a strict legal perfection in Heart and Life that was so sweet to Hezekiah in the reflection after he had received the sentence of Death in himself Isa 38. 3. And said Remember now O Lord I beseech thee how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart and have done that which is good in thy sight and Hezekiah wept sore Mr. Caryl from that part of Job's description This Man was perfect saith not that he had a legal perfection such a perfection as the Papists now contend for and assert to be possibly attainable yea actually attained by many in this Life But saith he the perfection here spoken of is the perfection of sincerity and he observes from the words after his explication First It is sincerity that especially commends us to God Secondly Saith he sincere and sound hearted Persons are in God's esteem perfect Persons It is not all that you can do or all that you can say or all that you can suffer or all that you can lose that can make you perfect in the esteem of God without sincerity add sincerity but to the least and it gives you the denomination of perfect Thus far this Reverend Author which Doctrine some Men call Popish so well are they acquainted what Popish Doctrine is Some Men seperate Faith and good Works and speak of them so as though there might be good Works without Faith Now for my part I know no good Works formally in a Theological sense but such as are done in Faith and I know nothing done in Faith that leads not to Christ and God in him and therefore for Persons to speak of good Works as such seperate from Faith and to speak of Faith leading the Soul off from Christ is manifestly vain Some Men will not grant that Faith is a qualification of right to Christ and his benefits and â—et they say to justifie is to make one legally just or just in Law so say I and can a Man be legally just without a legal righteousness and is not that which is a Righteousness a quality how then can a Man be just legally and not qualitatively Find me a Man that ever was legally just and yet not personally just in the sense of that Law which accounted him just and if personally just then primarily inherently just and if personally just just in his nature As I have said above so I must here say again let it be proved that Thomas is a Person without the nature of a Man or that the nature doth not go to constitute the Person when I speak of Faith as the qualifying matter in a Gospel sense some Persons have inferred from hence that this is all I intend in Justification whereas there is the form as I have said i. e. God's imputation by his Law of Grace his accounting such a Faith as accepts of Christ as our great Propitiation Head and Teacher by this his Law for the sake of Christ's satisfaction and Merit for Righteousness and forma dat esse Hence their inference is a meer fallacy à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter Will the Gospel assert a Person 's right to Christ and his benefits before conformity thereunto and when through grace any Person yields Conformity is it not a Gospel Righteousness and is not a Gospel Righteousness jus quoad eam legem a right in that Law to Christ Pardon and Life promised and is jus ad rem a right to a thing no qualification in a legal sense if not then the consequence must be that a penitent Believer as such subjectively hath no more actual right to Christ and Life according to the Gospel promise then an impenitent Infidel I speak not of a right by merit but both by qualification unto him that hath merited and unto Pardon and Life merited by him for us Faith it self as it is the Soul's first consent to accept of Christ to be its Propitiation Head and Teacher is really Gospel Obedience Rom. 16. 26. But now is made manifest and by the Scriptures of the Prophets according to the commandment of the everlasting God made known to all nations for the obedience of faith and that because it is the Soul's conformity to the Gospel command 1 John 3. 23. And this is his commandment That we should believe on the Name of his Son Jesus Christ love one another as he gave us commandment And Faith thus considered is that which unites to Christ and the qualifying matter which first gives the right John 1. 12. But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even to them that believe on his Name And as Faith is the Soul's consent to accept of Christ c. this consent includes the Soul 's free ingagement sincerely to be subject to what Christ commands so long as he continues it in the World in a dependance upon his power and faithfulness And this sincere obedience performed according to the Soul's first Covenant consent during its abode in this World is that whereby its right to Christ and saving blessings is continued Revel 22. 14. Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the City And this is agreeable to the mind of a Reverend and Judicious Divine as he Illustrates it by a Marriage Covenant including constant fidelity And this Faith with him is a condition as it relates to the Covenant and a Righteousness in the sense of the Gospel as it is the performance of the condition And when he speaks of Christ's Righteousness being the cause and matter of Justification his declared sense is the meriting matter not that we might merit but have that by virtue of his merit which the Gospel requires to give us right to Pardon and Life and what is this but our sincere consent which is Faith Our Divines excluding good Works from the matter of Justification spoke of good Works with relation to the Law of Innocency and indeed Evangelical Obedience will be no qualifying matter of right in the sense of that Law and that they did so is plain forasmuch as their argument is because they are imperfect perfect therefore say they it must be a perfect
is not actually healing to the Sick until it prevail against the Distemper and it is so with Grace And thus it may be known in what Sense Sanctification is before Justification Touching the gift of the first Grace know there is much good purchased by Christ and given without respect to any condition on Man's part and thus the gift of the first Grace God ordinarily by his Word 〈◊〉 Spirit concurring doth convince humble and incline the Sinner to accept of Christ in all his Offices i. e. to be Propitiation Head and Teacher and when the consent is gained then hath the Soul an actual interest in and right unto the Lord Jesus to be his Propitiation c. to the sanctifying Spirit to Reconciliation Adoption and Glorification The former work was to prevail with the Soul for its consent but when prevailed with then hath it an actual interest in and right unto Christ and the saving blessings of the Covenant promised upon consent A Man that Courts a Woman for her Consent to be his Wife untill this be given by her and she actually give up her self unto him to be his Wife she hath no interest in him as her Husband nor interest in nor right unto any of his Goods as one in that relation and thus it is in the Case before us If any Man saith Christ hear my voice and open the door I will come in to him and sup with him and he with me Revel 3. 20. SECT II. How the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness is to be held and how not AFter these things cleared I proceed to tell the World how I do and how I do not ◠〈◊〉 â— the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness I do not deny but affirm God's Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in these following Senses 1. God so far imputes it as that he accounts it was for our Redemption and Salvation Rom. 3. 24 25. 2. God so far imputes it as that he accounts it to be the sole or only Merit and Purchase of the New Covenant and the benefits thereof Heb. 7. 19. 2 Tim. 1. 10. 3. God so far imputes it as that he accounts it to Merit the Blessed Spirit for us to work Grace in our Hearts John 1. 16. Ephes 1. 3. 4. God so far imputes it as that he accounts it is for this that all the Grace and Duties of his People are accepted Ephes 1. 6. 5. God so far imputes it as that he accounts it is for this he pardons us and receives us into his favour and justifies us by his Covenant of Grace upon believing and so accepts our Faith for Righteousness it is not without Christ but for him Acts 13. 38 39. Golos 1. 21 22 23. 6. I do believe that what Christ did and suffered he did and suffered for us in the Person of a Mediatour and God doth account what he did and suffered as Mediatour doth and shall avail as much for the obtaining of Pardon and Life for us upon Faith as though we had been able to have done and suffered the same in our own Persons 1 Peâ—â—r 3. 18. Heb. 9. 15. 1 Tim. 2. 5 6. Rom. 4. 23 24 25. John 3. 16. Now I desire to know in what any Christian in his Practice can make further use of the Lord Jesus than in those particulars forementioned and if he cannot make any use of Christ by Faith but what may be reduced to some of those particulars Can it be thought that God doth make over Christ unto him after some sort wherein he shall be of no use If not then â— desire to know what needs any further or any Imputation of Christ's Righteousness of another sort than hath been expressed I desire it may be taken notice of that whereas I have been accused by some as an Adversary to all Imputation of Christ's Righteousness they have misrepresented me and so have wronged me And I challenge any Man to shew in this Profession wherein I have detracted from the Grace of God or Merits of Christ But now having shewn in what Sense I hold the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness I must plainly tell the World that God doth not so impute the Righteousness of Christ unto us as that he accounts it in it self to be our very formal Personal Righteousness reckoning that what Christ did and suffered as our Mediatour we did and suffered in our own Persons i. e. obeyed in him and suffered in him in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency This is that I profess I dare not believe and the reason is the many gross and to be dreaded consequences with which such a Doctrine as this is loaded 1. It chargeth God with an untruth for God judgeth of things as they are and not as they are not if we then affirm that God accounts that what Christ did and suffered for us we did and suffered in our own Persons in the Sense of his violated Law which he must do if he account the very Righteousness of Christ to be ours in it self then he must account us to have done and suffered that in our own Persons which he knows we neither did nor suffered and if so then let it be considered what must follow 2. If Christ's Righteousness be imputed in it self then the Law of perfect sinless Works must justifie us for if God in our Justification do account the Righteousness of Christ in it self to be our formal personal justifying Righteousness then he must account us to be such as have a sinless perfect habitual and active Righteousness for such was the Righteousness of Christ and if God do account us to have such a righteousness as this in our own Persons then it must follow that the Law of Innocency must justifie us as well as it did Christ for what should hinder if we have the very same righteousness which is Christs to be our formal personal righteousness and have it we must if God do impute it unto us in it self and account it in that Imputation to be such a righteousness as formal and personal And from hence we must implicitly hold that God in our Justification doth account us to be as righteous as Christ which some have had the Confidence to affirm and all from this Doctrine for I hope People are not to learn that Christ's righteousness habitual and active was a perfect conformity to the Law of Innocency and if we be such in the Sense of that it accounting that what Christ was and did we were and did in him in point of conformity then in this very account it justifies us 3. God must account us such as are habitually and actively sinless and Holy such as have neither Sin in our Nature and Life for Christ was such and if we have the very same righteousness personally which he had which we must have if God account us as they say to have it then how can we chuse but be such as have neither Sin in Nature nor Life 4. That follows which
hath been asserted and is yet asserted by some God neither seeth nor can see Sin in his People and indeed how should it be if he account them habitually and actively sinless and Holy for where it is thus there can be no Sin in their Natures and if so then no Sin of Omission or Commission in the Life and if no Sin neither in Nature nor Life how should God see any 5. If we be such as God accounts in our Justification to be both habitually and actively Holy and sinless then we need no Pardon for there needs no Pardon where there is no Sin nor Fault and if we who are justified have no Sin to Pardon then there needs no Confession of Sin nor Repentance nor Faith in Christ for Pardon and so no Gospel Obedience seeing we have the same legal Righteousness as they say in God's account which Christ had and so we must be justified by the Law of Works as he was and thus the Gospel and Covenant of Grace which offers Pardon to Sinners upon Confession Repentance and Faith becomes a meer nothing and the whole frame of Christianity is taken down Well but they may say we are not inherently righteous by Christ's Righteousness I Answer if they be personally righteous with Christ's righteousness they must be inherently righteous with the same as I have before manifested 6. If God impute the righteousness of Christ unto us in it self and so in the Sense of the violated Law of Innocency reckon us to have done what Christ did and to have suffered what Christ suffered in our own Persons then he must reckon us such as have performed the very acts of Mediation and Redemption for wherein did Christ's Mediation and Redemption consist but in his Obedience and Sufferings I speak of this his work upon Earth which constituted his Active and Passive Righteousness And if so be that God in justifying of us do account us to have the very same righteousness which Christ had for our formal personal righteousness then he must account us to have that which is and was a mediating and redeeming righteousness and so to have that of our own by his gift as our very personal righteousness whereby we may be Mediatours and Redeemers for our selves and others 7. If God impute the righteousness of Christ in it self and account it our formal personal righteousness then it is only the righteousness of Christ he imputes as Man or the righteousness of Christ as God man If the former then they must hold that the righteousness of Christ as Man only is efficacious and he needed not be God if the righteousness of Christ as God-man then God must account them such as have a Divine righteousness as well as an Humane to be their formal personal righteousness and if so then that opinion hereby is established of being Godded with God and Christed with Christ and what I dread to say they must implicitly affirm themselves to be partakers of the very Essence of God and so God's Essence must be divided into so many parts as there are justified Believers and these Believers must be made partakers of the incommunicable Attributes of God Now upon the matter to hint it again when I say that Faith is our Gospel Righteousness and that God by the Gospel doth account it our personal justifying Righteousness it is manifest from what I have already said I do not intend only the â—â—NRâ—â— credere or the very act of Faith without relation to its Object Christ and his righteousness though some for all I have said have been bold to affirm I do for that would be no true Faith at all and far then from justifying for Faith justifies as it unites unto and gives the Soul interest in Christ and this it doth as it is the Souls free consent to take Christ as it is to be said in all his Offices upon which the Soul hath an actual right unto him and the benefits of the Covenant purchased by him and this is plain Gospel Justification as for instance Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved Acts 16. 31. When therefore any Soul believes this his Faith is his Obedience and Conformity unto the Gospel command and so his Gospel Righteousness and as such his actual right through and for Christ to the Salvation promised Would the Jaylor have had a right unto the promised Salvation had he not believed I mean an actual right must it not be said no Upon his Faith then he had a right and this his Faith was his obedience to the Gospel command therefore it was his obedience to the command which was his Gospel Righteousness and so his right by Christ according to God's own fixed Law of Grace unto Salvation Hath any Man an actual right to Heaven but a Believer if he have let it be proved from Scripture if none have but such an one then the Believer only I speak of the Adult hath the actual right and is it not plain then 't is his Faith that gives him this right To illustrate this such a Man makes a Purchase of an Inheritance After Purchase bequeaths it by Testament or Will to this or the other Person upon the performance of such or such conditions specified in the Testament or Will if the conditions be performed according to the Testament of the Donor then he hath an actual right in Law unto the Inheritance if not he hath no right of claim if he perform the conditions the Law will vindicate his right and the Judge by Law if he do Justice if he do not perform the conditions the Law cannot nor will not give him a right to the Inheritance nor the Judge by Law 't is just thus in the matter before us and the application is easie SECT III. Scripture to prove the Imputation of Faith and an Answer to such Texts as are alledged for Imputation of Christ's Righteousness IF I should pass on further to prove from Scripture that not Christ's Righteousness in it self but Faith as it accepts of Christ as offered in the Gospel is now a Sinners formal justifying Righteousness before God I should have a large Field and might multiply express Scripture Texts for the Imputation of such a Faith but not one express Text in all the Bible can be found for the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self nay nor implicit Let us consider a few Texts among many Rom. 4. 3. Abraham believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousness What was accounted unto him for Righteousness Well say they not Faith but its Object i. e. the Righteousness of Christ But pray where have we any such word in the Text and besides here is the object of his faith express and that is God Abraham believed God now if they will have not Faith but its Object to be counted for Righteousness then the words must be read thus Abraham believed God and God was counted unto him for Righteousness and if they
Heart quickning influences of the blessed Spirit But then if I be a Believer that I have it in it self and that it is of all these uses to me as it is accounted by God to be my formal personal Righteousness this I must deny for if so it must not be the Righteousness which is Christs and proper to him as Mediatour for which a Believer shall be delivered from everlasting shame and secured from God's wrath but the Righteousness of Christ as it is a Christian 's formal personal Righteousness and so as a quality in himself and it must not be the Graces of the Spirit and so not God's moral Image wherewith the Soul of a true Christian is adorned nor the Holy Spirits influences whereby it is quickned but only the Righteousness of Christ imputed in it self and so accounted to be his formal personal Righteousness And if it be thus then the Righteousness of Christ as Mediatour and the quâ—ckning and sanctifying operations of the Holy Spirit must be needless For whatever is a Believer's formal personal Righteousness it must not only be imputed unto him but be a quality in him as I have cleared above that whatever is the formal Righteousness of the Person must be the Righteousness of the Nature if therefore the Righteousness of Christ as they say be the formal Righteousness of the Person then that Person who is formally righteous by it must be perfectly righteous seeing Christ's Righteousness in it self which they say they have to be their personal Righteousness is such And if so what need of the Righteousness of a Mediatour or the graces and influences of the Holy Spirit for a Christian he being perfectly righteous in his very Nature with Christ's Righteousness Now they will say this they will not own and if not then why do they own and stick by such a Doctrine which hath such natural and unavoidable consequences as these I would gladly have these Persons consider whether they dare trust to this Righteousness of Christ for their Justification and Acceptation as it is their formal personal Righteousness without any further regard had to Christ as Mediatour without them if so then what need of Christ's Mediation without them if not then they must have Christ's Mediation without them for the acceptation of Christ's Righteousness upon them and doth Christ's own Righteousness stand in need of Christ's Mediation for its Acceptation I know not how they can come off here without either denying that a Person considered as justified needs Christ's Mediation or accounting the Righteousness of Christ upon them in the Sense of the Law of Innocency to be imperfect Take the former and they exclude Christ from being a Mediatour for a justified Person as such take the later and they destroy their own Assertion that there is no Justification but by a perfect legal Righteousness but I shall leave them in their own snaâ—e and pass on and I am like for they will not suffer me or any Man to help them 2. Another Text alledged to prove that Christ's Righteousness is imputed to Believers in it self and so is their formal personal Righteousness and so accounted by God is Jer. 23. 6. And this is his Name whereby he shall be called The Lord our Righteousness That Christ is the Lord our Righteousness I grant but where is it said in this Scripture that his Righteousness is accounted ours as to be the formal Righteousness of our Persons And if it be said Although it be not expressed yet it is intended I Answer it cannot be for Christ's Righteousness being a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness it must be proper â—o him as Mediatour and what is proper to him as Mediatour cannot be in it self the formal personal Righteousness of another nor so accounted by God for God doth not look upon any Believer to have a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness which he must have if he have the Righteousness of Christ to be his personal Righteousness for his personal formal Righteousness But God doth account every true Believer to have that Righteousness or to be so personally Righteous by the Righteousness of Faith as that he hath right by virtue of the promise of grace to those blessed and glorious benefits purchased by Christ by whose satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness this his Faith is accepted for Righteousness upon which Christ is the Lord of this Righteousness this Gospel Righteousness as the Purchaser Lord-Treasurer and dispenser of all Grace and may well then be called the Lord our Righteousness but then it doth not follow that the Righteousness of Christ which is proper to him as Mediatour and so for us is ours in it self and our very formal personal Righteousness 3. Another Text is in Isa 45. 24. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness and strength We may from this Scripture groundedly conclude that a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness is to be found only in Christ and that this is sufficient to satisfie offended Justice and merit all good for us but what is this to prove that God accounts this his righteousness to be our personal formal Righteousness The Text saith no such thing and if it mean Christ's Righteousness as Mediatour the Text saith expresly it is in him and the Believer doth acknowledge it so to be and therefore not in himself which yet it must be if it be the Righteousness of his Person as hath been already shewn 4. A fourth Text is in Isa 61. 10. I will greatly rejoyce in the Lord my Soul shall be joyful in my God for he hath clothed me with the Garments of Salvation he hath covered me with the Robe of Righteousness as a Bride groom decketh himself with Ornaments and as a Bride adorneth her self with her Jewels That this Text cannot be meant of a Believer's being clothed with Christ's Righteousness as a Robe in a proper Sense hath been made manifest and if it be so improperly i. e. a Robe then only in a comparative Sense as to its use and that it may fitly be compared unto a Garment or Robe as to its use as satisfactory and meritorious with respect unto a Believer I grant but that it hath the use of a Garment so as to be any Person 's formal Righteousness this I deny and that upon the Reasons above given which Reasons are sufficient to manifest that whatever Text of Scripture be brought for proof that Christ's Righteousness is a Robe in their Sense is mistaken by them And whereas they alledge among the rest that in Revel 19. 8. speaking of the Church And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linnen clean and white for the fine linnen is the righteousness of Saints 'T is not said this fine linnen is the Righteousness of Christ though the Righteousness of Christ we acknowledge did purchase and merit it But the Righteousness of the Saints i. e. the purity and holiness of the Saints and that it is so let the
Psalmist determine Psalm 45. 13 14. The King's daughter is all glorious within her cloathing is of wrought gold She shall be brought unto the King in raiment of Needle-work the Virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee And so the Apostle Paul Ephes 5. 25 26 27. Husbands love your Wives even as Christ also loved the Church and gave himself for it That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word That he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing 5. A Fifth Text is in Rom. 3. 22. Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe for there is no difference This Righteousness of God say they is the Righteousness of Christ imputed and accounted to be a Believer's formal personal Righteousness but that by the Righteousness of God in this Scripture and others cannot be meant the Righteousness of Christ is manifest 1. Because this righteousness which is called the righteousness of God is opposed unto the righteousness of the Law and is said ver 21. to be without the Law But the righteousness of Christ is not opposed to the righteousness of the Law he being conformed unto the Law both in habit and act 2. By the righteousness of God cannot be meant God's righteousness it self I hope they will grant and if not then from it they cannot gather that the righteousness of Christ in it self is imputed seeing it is a divine as well as an humane righteousness unless they will say it is the humane righteousness of Christ only which is imputed in it self and if so it could nothing avail them for though it be true the humane righteousness of Christ would have availed himself as the Law of Innocency justified him thereupon as a righteous Man Yet it would have availed us nothing at all without the conjunction of his divine righteousness seeing without this it would not have been for others satisfactory and meritorious therefore I conclude that Faith in Jesus Christ is the righteousness which is here called the righteousness of God and that because God by the Gospel hath constituted and appointed this to be that which he will accept instead of legal perfect righteousness and for the sake of Christ's satisfactory and meritorious righteousness will justifie us by his Law of Grace and thereby give right to Pardon and Life What hath been said to this Text may be sufficient to give light to understand the meaning of that Text so much urged Phil. 3. 9. And be found in him not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith And so Rom. 1. 17. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith as it is written The just shall live by faith Rom. 10. 3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God 2 Cor. 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him 6. The sixth Text is Rom. 4. 6. Even as David also describeth the blessâ—dness of the Man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works This righteousness say they which God in this Text is said to impute can be no other but the righteousness of Christ There hath been enough said to shew it cannot be righteousness of Christ in it self which is imputed I would gladly have Men to consider what the Apostle in this his dispute undertakes to prove can any thing be more clear than that it is Justification by Faith in opposition unto the works of the Law both of Innocency and Moses But here is the grand mistake of these Men when the Apostle is only excluding works with relation to the Law of Innocency or the Law of Moses from Justification they understand him universally as excluding also Gospel works such as Faith c. which yet nothing can be more express and plain the Apostle is pleading for Justification by Verse 9. For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness And this Apostle at the fifth ver of this Chapter affirms that faith is accounted for righteousness And if so which is express then faith must be the righteousness of which the fifth Verse speaks Well but say they it is not faith that is this righteousness but the object Christ's righteousness if they mean it is not faith abstracted or seperate from its object that is this righteousness I say the same for it is no true faith which hath not Christ for its object But if they mean that it is the object it self that justifies and not faith with relation unto the object here I must leave them and that because I must believe the Apostle before them and there is nothing in all the Scripture more manifest than that though there be neither conformity to the Law of Innocency nor the Law of Moses though a Man neither can nor shall be accounted by God righteous in the sense of these Laws yet where there is a consormity to the Gospel Law we have David's testimony saith the Apostle that Man shall be blessed and this his conformity shall be by God accounted for righteousness And what wonderful grace is it that God will accept for the sake of Christ the sincere obedience of faith instead of a sinless perfect obedience But say these Men if you are justified by faith you are justified by works and so exclude the grace of God The Apostle saith the contrary Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace Verse 16. But this I suppose they cannot or will not understand but think that if it be by faith it must be by a work exclusive of grace They consider not that faith is the free gift of God through Christ and that it is by grace that God saves through faith Ephes 2. 8. For by grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God A Soul being by the Holy Spirit convinced of its own sinful and lost condition and its own inability and insufficiency to save it self out of this condition by the light of the Gospel it hath a discovery there is a sufficiency of Satisfaction Merit Power and Spirit in Christ for its Pardon and Life beside a free offer herein of this grace unto it immediately as it is really burdened with Sin and under the fears of eternal perishing and so truly willing of Christ and his Grace above all the World upon which the Soul penitentially renouncing the World the Flesh and the Devil gives its actual consent to accept of Christ for its Propitiation Head and Teacher and so to be subject to God in him by the Holy Spirit Here now is the
that which the Apostle opposeth to that Law he speaks of in Philip. 3. 9. the righteousness or observation of which â—e disclaims in point of Justification or as that which gives any right to Christ Pardon and Life And therefore the righteousness of this Law i. e. the Law of Faith is called by the Apostle in this Verse the righteousness which is through the Faith of Christ and the righteousness of God by Faith this this is the righteousness which hath Christ for its Object and is appointed by God in his Covenant of Grace to be our personal justifying righteousness This was the righteousness the Apostle would have that he might be found in him i. e. united unto him Very few of our Divines but they hold we are united to Christ by Faith and this was that the Apostle valued above all union with him seeing then the Apostle opposeth that which gives interest in Christ and union with him unto his own righteousness in this Verse that which gives interest then and unites must be Faith and so he must be far from disclaiming it as dung Now if so Persons will have the righteousness of Christ meant by this righteousness through Faith and by Faith then it must be the righteousness of Christ which unites to Christ and so the same thingmust unite unto and give interest in it self But whoever said this But to proceed no further in this let us hear what they have to say for the vindication of this strict Imputation of Christ's righteousness 1. Christ's righteousness say they must be our only personal justifying righteousness because there will be no standing in judgment before God unless we be cloathed with a perfect righteousness and there is no such righteousness but that of Christ's I Answer if the process in judgment should be according to the terms of the Law of Innocency i. e. that Sentence must pass upon Persons according to conformity or non-conformity to this Law then the reason would be cogent But seeing it shall not there is no force in it at all That it shall not See Rom. 2. 16. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of Men by Christ Jesus according to my Gospel 2 Thes 1. 7 8. And to you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ which Scriptures with others make it manifest the Gospel shall be the rule of judgment Hence therefore as Persons in judgment shall be found such as have been obedient or disobedient to the Gospel so shall the Sentence pass to Life or Condemnation John 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting LIfe and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Though know it shall be for the sake of Christ's perfect righteousness that such as are found true penitent Believers shall be adjudged to eternal Life at that day seeing had it not been for this his meritorious righteousness there had been no Covenant of Grace and so no accepting of any to Life upon such terms as the Gospel requires so that the whole glory of Believers Salvation must redound to him I speak here of the Adult unless Persons have an interest in and a right unto a perfect righteousness and so unto the righteousness of Christ they shall not be cleared and adjudged to Life in judgment But the Question is Whether all have an interest in and a right unto his righteousness If not Who are they that have Will you say any speaking of the Adult that live under the sound of the Gospel but such as are found obedient thereunto And are not true penitent Believers the Persons which are obedient if so then they are the Persons who shall be cleared and adjudged to eternal Life in judgment But it may be said not for their Repentance and Faith I Answer still not for these as the purchasing meriting causes but upon these as the qualifying matter of right which qualifying matter of right though it be not as is acknowledged a righteousness answerable to the Law of Innocency and so can be no justifying righteousness in the account of that Law yet is a righteousness agreeable to the Gospel and so is a justifying righteousness in the judgment of that Law 2. Christ's righteousness say they must be our only personal justifying righteousness because all that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another and this other by whose righteousness they must be justified can be none but Christs I Answer I do not deny but affirm that those that are justified are justified by the righteousness of another and that by Christs and his only as the purchase and merit of Justification But then that this is the qualifying righteousness of mine or another's Person which gives interest in Christ and a right to Pardon and Life according to the Gospel this I deny For though it be for Christ we are justified yet it is by Faith in him as imputed by God we are formally justified and made righteous which Faith though it be our own and so our own righteousness by free gift and possession yet is none of our own but Christ's in point of Merit and thus we are justified by a righteousness Christ hath merited and God's in point of Efficiency as he by his Spirit is the Author of it And there is this I would ask by the way i. e. Whether Justification be not a Gospel priviledge if it be as I hope it will not be denied Then are not all Gospel priviledges purchased and merited by Christ if so then certainly Justification among the rest And if Justification give me leave further to ask Did Christ purchase and merit his own righteousness you grant he purchased and merited the priviledge of Justification and you say that Christ's righteousness is the only formal justifying righteousness of our Persons must you not then also say that he purchased and merited his own righteousness certainly yes Now pray When or how or by what did Christ this if you say that Christ did not purchase and merit his own righteousness then I ask How did he purchase and merit Justification And how is Justification then in your Sense a Gospel priviledge purchased and merited by Christ It may be you will say that Christ purchased and merited that his righteousness might be imputed by God unto us for our Justification grant this still you must say that he purchased and merited not that which you call the matter of your Justification and so what you say must come to this that Christ did not merit and purchase that which justifies you and if so then that which justifies you must not be that which is purchased and merited by Christ See then however in this if the charge of Socinianism do not fall foul upon your selves
How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God to purge your Conscience from dead works to serve the living God And for this cause he is the Mediatour of the New Testament that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Heb. 7. 25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the utmost that come unto God by him seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them But it may further be said for I shall deal fairly and let him have what advantage upon the point he can He speaks only of the righteousness of both natures united in Christ and intends this is not imputed I Answer there cannot be the imputation of the active and passive obedience of Christ in his sense without the Imputation of this for consider we his obedience in Life and Death as the obedience of one who is not God Man united and so essentially infinitely righteous as God and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man that obedience could not be the obedience of Christ but if we consider his obedience in Life and Death as the obedience of one who is God Man united in one Person and so essentially infinitely righteous as God and perfectly in his nature righteous as Man then if it be imputed in this Man's sense it must be imputed as the obedience of such an one and how can the righteousness which constituted him a â—it Mediatour not be imputed when the acts as they are the acts of such a Person a Person so and so qualified are imputed And were Christ's acts any further satisfactory and meritorious than they were the acts of such a Person as he was If not then take away that which qualified and made him meet to be a Mediatour and see then if his acts in obeying and suffering can be satisfactory and meritorious and if the Persons have satisfactory and meritorious acts imputed unto them in this Man s sense then that which makes them such they must also have imputed And if they say they have not the righteousness of Christ as satisfactory and meritorious imputed then they must not have it imputed at all and consequently deny all imputation of Christ's Righteousness in any sense which I do not for as I have said above if we could take away from Christ's Righteousness which we cannot it 's satisfaction and Merit that which remains with respect to our Justification and Salvation will be none of his But further saith he it is the acts works doings and obedience of this blessed Mediatour that are imputed and counted to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness Mark if God do impute or count the very acts works doings and obedience of the Mediatour to the Elect for their justifying Righteousness or as he saith in this his Article to be the material and formal cause of their Justification then God must account them to have that Righteousness which in its own nature is a Mediatory Righteousness for such were Christ's acts as Mediatour to be their personal justifying Righteousness Now if any Man be accounted formally righteous in his own Person with that Righteousness which in its own nature is Mediatory then he must be counted to be righteous personally with such a Righteousness as is satisfactory and meritorious after an infinite sort and if he be one that is personally righteous with a satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness and this of an infinite value for such was and is Christ's then how should he chuse but be Godded with God and Christed with Christ and be accounted to have that whereby he may be a Redeemer Saviour anâ— Mediatour both for himself and others yea to have Christ's Office wholly put into his hand now I have so much charity for this Man though he be my professed Adversary and for others that have the like notions with him as to believe that they do neither hold nor intend these consequences which are so gross but they themselves lead me by their hot opposition to shew that these are the unavoidable consequences of such a Doctrine if peradventure they may be convinced It is out of doubt with me that many good and gracious Persons have imbibed and stuck to this notion of the strict Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in it self who yet have abhorred the consequences that have been natural therefrom But then their practice hath ever contradicted this notion and hereby they were kept in the way of safety But then I think it somewhat dangerous when God hath set up before Persons more clear light and yet they are so hot in their opposition as that they will not take time to consider whether it be light from the word or no but almost upon the first hearing or upon a very slight trial cry out Popery Quakerism Arminianism Socinianism and what not Suppose we now that such as pass under any of these names do hold this or the truth what must it be a sufficient Argument for me to relinquish that truth because they hold it for my part I do profess to the World let Men think and say what they please that I am for Catholick truth that is truth where-ever or in whomsoever shall be owned by me so far as I can have evidence for the Devil himself believes that there is a great dreadful and terrible God and I believe the same and am certain in that I do well James 2. 19. And I must not therefore because the Devil believes this turn Atheist But after these Men have done what they can they can never make that they oppose into what they fain I am afraid would 13. I believe â—aith he that by this obediential Righteousness of Christ all the Elect of God are or shall be freely justified from all things Acts 1â— 39. for it is by the obedience of one and not by the Faith and Obedience of many that many are justified and made righteous Râ—m 5. 19. Observe the Scripture Acts 13. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that believe are justified and he saith all the Elâ—ct 〈◊〉 seems he likes not this Scripture expression his Wisdom thinks another better and therefore for all that believe he puts in all the Elect perhaps he is for Justification before Faith and so thinks Elect a term more agreeing to his purpose than believe and he thinks not far amiss if that be his notion but then it might be asked from whence he had his dispensation for such a change I believe according to that Scripture Acts 13. 39. that by Christ and his satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness all that truly believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses i. e. according to the Covenant of Grace have a right to Christ Pardon and Life purchased by him and also I believe the truth of that Text Rom. 5. 19. that
him give me but an instance of any one Holy Person indeed that suffered and lost his Life because he would not comply with such Doctrine as this but opposed it and I profess and promise I will then believe what hâ— saith but I know he cannot and yet he dare write this and not only so but make it an Article of his Faith 23. I believe saith he that such an one naming me in this point is contrary to the 11th 13th and 17th Article of the Church of England and to the Assemblies greater and lesser Catechism As to this my reply is If I did as much contradict in opinion the Articles he mentions as he doth that in the 27th Article of the Church of England i. e. the Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church as most agreeable with the Institution of Christ I should account my self no better than perjured look what he doth with it seeing he either hath or should have subscribed it I cannot tell And as for those that he mentions which he saith I am contrary to I challenge him or any Man else to shew me in any thing I have writ or preached that I do contradict them As for the point in hand I affirm with this 11th Article and agree fully with it That it is not for the merit of our own works we are accounted righteous before God or for our own deservings but only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith which is the very same Doctrine I have been and am pleading for I wonder what this same Man thought of when he writ after this sort unless he thought himself that he had a dispensation to write what he pleased and no Man must examine it though concerned so to do And then he saith further I am contrary to the Assemblies greater and lesser Catechism If he intended the whole of what is contained therein I must say it is as grand an untruth as ever was told and if he intended their definition of Justification that I am contrary to this taken in a sound sense sure I am he cannot prove and seeing that particular Men have taken the liberty to put their own interpreâ—ation upon what the Assembly say Justification is why may not I If this then be meant when they say that Justification is an act of God's free grace whereby he pardoneth all our sins and accepteth us as righteous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ight only for the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us and received â—y Faith alone i. e. That God of his free Grace fortâ—e Righteousness sake of Christ accounted by him to be the only satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness for us upon our sincere Faith accepts or reckons us righteous in the sense of the Gospel and pardons all our Sins In this I am not contrary to them but one with them And let him prove if he can that his Exposition is contradictory to the Scripture And whereas he alledgeth I have expressed my self formerly in this matter otherwise than I do now I acknowledge the truth hereof and have occasion to lament that as many others are I was lead too much by an implicit Faith forming notions according to the ordinary Phrase of such whose practice contradicted their notion in thâ—s matter as I have shewn without examining whether or no they were concordant to the Sacred Text. 24. I believe saith he that God seeth no sin in his Children and People that by Faith and Regeneration are in Christ from which they are not justified And here he makes a challenge Let those that hold the contrary tell me the meaning of these Scriptures and he heaps up a great many as Numb 23. 21 c. And yet saith he God's People have daily need to confess their sins and pray for pardon Now here I would ask whether they are pardoned or unâ—ardoned Sins they are to confess and seek pardon for If he say pardoned Sins then it must be God's Peoples daily practice to acknowledge themselves to be under the guilt of that Sin which they are not and to make no other confession of Sin and also to crave pardon for that Sin and no other which is already pardoned and if any can make this good they may If he say that it is Sin as unpardoned they are to confess and crave pardon for then there must be unpardoned Sin in God's Children and People that by Faith and Regeneration as he saith are in Christ and can there be unpardoned Sin or the guilt of Sin in such and God not see it If so then God must never pardon it for God doth pardon only that which he sees and knows to be Sin and if God never pardon it then the guilt must remain and if the guilt ever remain the consequence must be they die bound over to Eternal punishment and so must Eternally perish though such as were by Faith and Regeneration in Christ Touching that Text which is alledged by him and others have urged before him i. e. Numb 23. 21. He hath not beheld Iniquity in Jacob neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel the Lord his God is with him and the shout of a King is among them The occasion was Balak would have had Balaam to have cursed Israel in the name of God or to have obtained God's curse upon them saith Balaam implicitely this I cannot do for though there be Sin in them and among them as well as in and among other People yet God seeth not that Iniquity and perverseness in them for which he will suffer such a curse to pass upon them as thou wouldest have Now what an arguing is this of this Man which he hath from others it is à particulari ad universale i. e. because God beheld not that Iniquity in Jacob noâ— perverseness in Israel for which he would suffer Balaam to curse them therefore he beheld and see no Sin at all in them It is just as if a Man should argue God seeth no such Sin in this or the other Person for which they should justly suffer or be executed as Thieves or Murderers and therefore he seeth no Sin at all in them There is this further I desire may be observed this Text he alledgeth either refers to the whole body of the People or but to a part If but to a part then Balak would but have had a part of them cursed If to the whole body then according to this Doctrine this Man hath from others they must every individual of them have been justified and been in Christ by Faith and Regeneration and can we have ground for this that there was not one Unbelieving Unregenerate Soul then among the whole body of the People This is not to be imagined by any He further quotes Psalm 32 1 2. Rom. 4. 5 6 7. but these I have explained already Another he alledgeth is Cant. 4. 7. Christ speaking of his Church saith thou art all fair my love there
e. that the Law of Innocency approves and accepts of Christ's Righteousness Grant I must that Christ as Man was conformed to the Law of Innocency both in Nature and Life and that his Sufferings were in the place and stead of those Sufferings which were due unto us in Law for our Violation thereof and that both his active and passive Obedience was for us in a way of Mediation and Redemption But then that either the active Obedience of Christ considered as our Mediatour was approved and accepted by this Law for that Obedience which was due unto it from us in our own Persons or his passive Obedience for those sufferings which were due unto us by this Law threat this I deny for this Law knows nothing of a Mediatour for us for if so provision should have been made for such an one â—y it and in it but who will say this It is then the great Lawgiver that approves and accepts of the Righteousness of Christ for us as satisfactory and meritorious having left himself a liberty to dispence with his own Law as to the strict exaction and execution of it upon valuable consideration given by a Mediatour whose Obedience should be of infinite worth For if the Law of Innocency violated by Man's Sin should approve and accept Christ's Righteousness for Sinners as their Surety and Mediatour instead of that Obedience they were bound to perform then it must account them righteous in Christ's performance and if it account them righteous then it must justifie them and if it justifie them it must account them such as are sinless and perfectly Holy in Nature and Life for it will justifie none else Let me not be mistaken here I deny not but affirm that the Law of Innocency did both approve and accept of the Obedience of Christ or else he had not been justified by it But then that this Law did approve and accept of this Obedience of Christ as our Surety and Mediatour as to account it was so for us as that we obeyed in him this I deny For if so it cannot chuse but discharge us and we must need no Pardon for he cannot be said to have a Pardon that in the Laws own sense and acceptation pays the whole of what it requires either by himself or by another the Law allowing And he adds that the exact justice and free Grace of God do not only agree and kiss each other but that they are both exalted and glorified in the Justification of a Sinner I grant him the whole of this for it is of Faith that it might be by Grace and it is by Faith in such a way as justice hath full satisfaction yea and all the glorious perfections of God shine forth and must do for ever Further saith he how any Man can find his consequence I suppose he either would or should have said his conscience free from the accusation of the Law without such a â—â—ghteousness I cannot yet see To this I shall say we have all transgressed the Law it has concluded us all under Sin and as such condemns us and if we be convinced our Consciences do and must accuse us as guilty and bear witness for the Laws equity in this its process so that there is no stopping the execution of the Laws sentence by the procuring of Pardon or an act of Grace by any thing but by the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ and this Righteousness shall not actually avail any for the purpose above but the penitent Believer for he that believeth not remains condemned and he that repents not continues unforgiven as to special Pardon as the Scripture is plain for the purpose Our Consciences then accusing us as Sinners for non-conformity unto and violation of this Holy Law of God which we must acknowledge so long as we live we are justly accused of or else we must deny our selves to be Sinners and affirm we are counted by this Law to be sinless and perfectly righteous that which must quiet our Consciences here and free us from fear and terror of having the Laws curse inflicted as to its full and eternal extent must be only the satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ by which we are delivered from the execution of its curse But if our Consciences accuse us of Impenitency and Infidelity and so to be such as have no actual interest in or right to Christ and his Righteousness for the purpose above spoken of there is nothing can quiet our Consciences here or remove our fear but our having of true Repentance and Faith found in us But again faith he nor can I see without such a Righteousness how the Doctrine of Faith establisheth the Law I grant him that without the Righteousness of Christ the Doctrine of Faith neither doth nor can establish the Law But then how wants explication I say then upon this Although the Doctrine of Faith or the Doctrine of Justification by Faith doth make void the Law suppose we the Law injoining perfect sinless works as a Covenant of Life and so as an instrument of our Justification not from any default in it self but from our moral infirmity or weakness yet the Doctrine of Faith doth not make it void as a Rule of Obedience seeing the Gospel which is the Law of Faith besides its own proper precepts hath also this proper unto it self to injoin us sincere Obedience to the Moral Law which shall for Christ be accepted instead of strict Legal perfection and thus the Law is established by Faith But if this may not content I shall shew him and others another way of Faiths establishing the Law and that is thus God accepting now the Obedience of Faith according to the Gospel Law which includes sincere Obedience to the precepts of that which is ordinarily called Moral as we consider Faith practical and this for the alone satisfactory and meritorious Righteousness of Christ hath hereby manifested that he could not so dispence with this his righteous and Holy Law as to pardon the violation or transgression of it without full satisfaction given to his governing Justice which satisfaction he hath had so that now in his justifying of a Sinner through Christ by Faith he keeps up the repute and credit of this his Law and so hath established it as a righteous and holy Law according to the Scripture Isa 42 21. The Lord is well pleased for his Righteousness sake he will magnifie the Law and make it honourable Rom. 3. 25 26. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of Sins that are past through the forbearance of God To declare I say at this time his Righteousness that he might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus He concludes this Article thus yet are we not justified by the Law though in a way of Law and Justice but freely by grace through the Redemption that is