Good Works and Justification by them which is a ready way to instruct men to Atheism or the scorn of every thing that is professed in Religion But yet 2. He shews how impotent and impertinent our Arguments are for the Proof of the Necessity of Holiness And as to the first of them from the Commands of God he saith that if after all these Commands God hath left it indifferent whether we obey him or no I hope such Commands cannot make Obedience Necessary Wonderful Divinity A Man must needs be well acquainted with God and himself who can suppose that any of his Commands shall leave it indifferent whether we will obey them or no. Yea but will he damn Men if they do not obey his Commands for Holiness Yes yes no doubt he will do so Yea but we may be notwithstanding this Command Justified and Saved without this Holiness False and Impertinent We are neither Justified nor saved without them though we are not Justified by them nor saved for them Unto my Inforcement of the Necessity of Holiness from the Ends of God in Election and Redemption he Replies page 127. The Father hath Elected us to be Holy and the Son Redeemed us to be Holy But will the Father Elect and the Son Redeem none but those who are Holy and Reject and Reprobate all others Doth this Election and Redemption suppose Holiness in us or is it without any regard to it For if we be Elected and Redeemed without any regard unto our own being Holy our Election and Redemption is secure whether we be Holy or not Wonderful Divinity again Election and Redemption suppose Holiness in us We are Elected and Redeemed with regard unto our own Holiness that is antecedently unto our Election and Redemption For Holiness being the Effect and Fruit of them is that which he opposeth Not many Pages after this he falls into a great Admiration of the Catechism of the Church of England which none blamed that I know of as to what is contained in it But it were to be wished that he had been well instructed in some others that he might not have divulged obtruded on the World such Crude and Palpable Mistakes For this Respect of Redemption at least unto an Antecedent Holiness in us that is antecedent unto it is such a piece of Foppery in Religion as a Man would wonder how any one could be guilty of who hath almost pored out his Eyes in Reading the Scripture All the remaining Cavils of this Chapter are but the Effects of the like fulsom Ignorance For out of some Passages scraped together from several parts of my Discourse and those not only cut off from their proper scope and End which is not mentioned by him at all but also mangled in their Representation he would frame the Appearance of a Contradiction between what I say on the one hand that there is no Peace with God to be obtained by and for Sinners but by the Atonement that is made for them in the Blood of Jesus Christ with the Remission of Sin and Justification by Faith which ensue thereon which I hope I shall not live to hear denyed by the Church of England and the Necessity of Holiness and Fruitfulness in Obedience to maintain in our own Souls a sence of that Peace with God which we have being Justified by Faith And he who understands not the Consistency of those things hath little Reason to despise good Catechisms what-ever thoughts he hath had of his own Sufficiency The whole Design of what remains of this Section is to insinuate that there can be no Necessity of Holiness or Obedience unto God unless we are Justified and saved thereby which I knew not before to to have been nor indeed do yet know it to be the Doctrine of the Church of England But be it whose it will I am sure it is not that of the Scripture and I have so disproved it in other Discourses which this Man may now see if he please as that I shall not here again reassume the same Argument And although I am weary of consulting this woful mixture of Disingenuity and Ignorance yet I shall mark somewhat on one or two Passages more and leave him if he please unto a due Apprehension that what remains is unanswerable Scoffing The First is that of Page 131. But however Holiness is Necessary with respect to Sanctification we have in us a New Creature 2. Cor. 5.17 This new Creature is fed Cherished Nourished and kept alive by the Fruits of Holiness To what End hath God given us new Hearts and New Natures Is it that we should Kill them stifle the Creature that is formed in us in the Womb That we should give him to the old Man to be devoured The Phrase of this is admirable and the Reasoning unanswerable For if Men be New Creatures they will certainly live new Lives and this makes Holiness absolutely necessary by the same Reason that every thing necessarily is what it is but still we enquire after a Necessary Obligation to the Practice of Holiness and that we cannot yet discover The Reader will see easily how this is pickt out of the whole Discourse as that which he imagined would yield some Advantage to reflect upon For let him pretend what he please to the Contrary he hath laid this End too open to be denied and I am no way solicitous what will be his success therein Had he aimed at the Discovery of Truth he ought to have examined the whole of the Discourse and not thus have rent one piece of it from the another As to the Phrase of Speech which I use it is I acknowledge Metaphorical but yet being used only in a Popular way of Instruction is sufficiently warranted from the Scripture which administers occasion and gives Countenance unto every Expression in it the whole being full well understood by those who are Exercised in the Life of God And for the Reasoning of it it is such as I know this man cannot Answer For the New Creature whatever he may fancy is not a new Conversation nor a Living Holily but it is the Principle and Spiritual Ability produced in Believers by the Power and Grace of the Holy Ghost enabling them to walk in newness of Life and Holiness of Conversation And this Principle being bestowed on us wrought in us for that very End it is necessary for us unless we will neglect and despise the Grace which we have received that we walk in Holiness and abound in the Fruits of Righteousness whereunto it leads and tends Let him answer this if he can and when he hath done so answer the Apostle in like manner or scoff not only at me but at him also The last passage I shall remarque upon in this Section is what he gives us as the sum of the whole Pag. 135. The sum of all is that to know Christ is not to be thus acquainted with his Person but to understand his Gospel in
already that I will not come to him nor any of his Companions to learn to Express my self in these things and moreover that I despise their Censures The Discourses he is carping at in particular in this place are neither Doctrinal nor Argumentative but consist in the Application of Truths before proved unto the Minds and Affections of men And as I said I will not come to him nor his Fraternity to learn how to manage such a subject much less a Logical and Argumentative way of Reasoning nor have any inducement thereunto from any thing that as yet I have seen in their Writings It also troubles him pag. 208. That whereas I know how unsuited the best and most accurate of our Expressions are unto the true Nature and Being of Divine things as they are in themselves and what need we have to make use of Allusions and sometimes less proper Expressions to convey a sence of them unto the Minds and Affections of men I had once or twice used that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if I may so say which yet if he had not known used in other good Authors treating of things of the same Nature he knew I could take protection against his severity under the Example of the Apostle using words to the same Purpose upon an alike Occasion Heb. 7. But at length he intends to be serious and from those words of mine Here is Mercy enough for the greatest the oldest the stubbornest Transgressor he addes Enough in all Reason this what a Comfort is it to Sinners to have such a God for their Saviour whose Grace is boundless and bottomless and exceeds the largest Dimensions of their Sins though there be a world of sin in them But what now if the Divine Nature it self have not such an endless boundless bottomless Grace and Compassion as the Doctor now talks of For at other times when it serves his turn better we can hear nothing from him but the Naturalness of Gods Vindictive Justice Though God be rich in Mercy he never told us that his Mercy was so boundless and bottomless he had given a great many Demonstrations of the severity of his Anger against sinners who could not be much worse than the Greatest the Oldest and stubbornest Transgressors Let the Reader take notice that I propose no Grace in Christ unto or for such Sinners but only that which may invite all sorts of them though under the most discouraging Qualifications to come unto him for Grace and Mercy by Faith and Repentance And on supposition that this was my sence as he cannot deny it to be I adde only in Answer that this his prophane scoffing at it is that which reflects on Christ and his Gospel and God himself and his Word which must be accounted for See Isa. 55.7 2 dly For the Opposition which he childishly frames between Gods Vindictive Justice and his Mercy and Grace it is answered already 3 dly It is false that God hath not told us that his Grace is boundless and bottomless in the sence wherein I use those words sufficient to pardon the greatest the oldest the stubbornest of sinners namely that turn unto him by Faith and Repentance And he who knowes not how this consists with Severity and Anger against impenitent sinners is yet to Learn his Catechism But yet he addes further pag. 208 209. Supposing the Divine Nature were such a bottomless Fountain of Grace how comes this to be a Personal Grace of the Mediator For a Mediator as Mediator ought not to be considered as the Fountain but as the Minister of Grace God the Father certainly ought to come in for a share at least in being the Fountain of Grace though the Doctor is pleased to take no notice of him But how excellent is the Grace of Christs Person above the Grace of the Gospel for that is a bounded and limited thing a straight Gate and narrow Way that leadeth unto Life There is no such Boundless Mercy as all the sins in the World cannot equal its Dimensions as will save the Greatest the Oldest and the stubbornest Transgressors I begg the Reader to believe that I am now so utterly weary with the Repetition of these impertinencies that I can hardly prevail with my self to fill my Pen once more with Ink about them And I see no reason now to goe on but only that I have begun And on all accounts I shall be as brief as possible I say then First I did not consider this boundless Grace in Christ as Mediator but considered it as in him who is Mediator and so the Divine Nature with all its Properties are greatly to be considered in him if the Gospel be true But 2 dly It is untrue that Christ as Mediator is only the Minister of Grace and not the Fountain of it for he is Mediator as God and Man in one Person 3 dly To suppose an exemption of the Person of the Father from being the Fountain of Grace absolutely in the Order of the Divine Subsistence of the Persons in the Trinity and of their Operations suited thereunto upon the Ascription of it unto the Son is a fond Imagination which could befall no man who understands any thing of things of this Nature It doth as well follow that if the Son created the World the Father did not if the Son uphold all things by the Word of his Power the Father doth not that is that the Son is not in the Father nor the Father in the Son The Acts indeed of Christs Mediation respect the Ministration of Grace being the procuring and communicating Causes thereof but the Person of Christ the Mediator is the Fountain of Grace So they thought who beheld his Glory the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth But the especial Relation of Grace unto the Father as sending the Son unto the Son as sent by him and incarnate and unto the Holy Spirit as proceeding from and sent by them both I have elsewhere fully declared and shall not in this place which indeed will scarce give Admittance unto any thing of so serious a nature again insist thereon 4 thly The Opposition which he would again set between Christ and the Gospel is impious in it self and if he thinks to charge it on me openly false I challenge him and all his Complices to produce any one word out of any Writing of mine that from a Plea or pretence of Grace in Christ should give Countenance unto any in the neglect of the least Precept given or Duty required in the Gospel And notwithstanding all that I have said or taught concerning the Boundless Bottomless Grace and Mercy of Christ towards believing humble penitent Sinners I doe believe the Way of Gospel Obedience indispensibly required to be walked in by all that will come to the Enjoyment of God to be so narrow that no Revilers nor false Accusers nor Scoffers nor Despisers of Gospel Mysteries continuing so to be can walk
of Grace and Truth said to be in Christ consists either in the Doctrine of the Gospel or in the Largeness of his Church In the latter that Faith in Christ is nothing but Believing the Gospel and the Authority of Christ who revealed it and by yielding Obedience whereunto we are justified before God on the account of an internal inherent Righteousness in our selves Now these are no small Undertakings the first of them being expressely contrary to the sence of the Catholick Church in all Ages For the Pelagians and the Socinians are by common Agreement excluded from an Interest therein And the latter of them contrary to the plain Confessions of all the Reformed Churches with the constant Doctrine of this Church of England and therefore we may justly expect that they should be managed with much strength of Argument and evident Demonstration But the Unhappiness of it is I will not say his but ours that these are not things which our Author as yet hath accustomed himself unto and I cannot but say that to my knowledge I never read a more weak loose and impertinent Discourse upon so weighty Subjects in my whole Life before He must have little to doe who can afford to spend his Time in a particular Examination of it unless it be in the Exposition of those places which are almost Verbatim transcribed out of Schlictingius Besides for the first Truth which he opposeth I have confirmed it in a Discourse which I suppose may be made publick before this come to View beyond what I expect any sober Reply unto from him Some Texts of Scripture that mention a Fulness in Christ he chooseth out to manifest to speak a Word by the way that indeed they do not intend any such Fulness in Christ himself And the first is Joh. 1.16 The Exposition whereof which he gives is that of Schlictingius who yet extends the import of the words beyond what he will allow The Enforcement which he gives unto his Exposition by comparing the 14 and 17 Verses with the 16. is both weak and contradictory of it self For the words of the 14 Verse are The Word was made Flesh and dwelt amongst us and we beheld his Glory the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth It is evident beyond contradiction that the Expression full of Grace and Truth is Exegetical of his Glory as the only begotten of the Father which was the Glory of his Person and not the Doctrine of the Gospel And for the opposition that is made between the Law given by Moses and the Grace and Truth which came by Jesus Christ I shall yet rather adhere to the sense of the Ancient Church and the most Eminent Doctors of it which if he knows not it to be concerning the Effectual Communication of real renewing sanctifying Grace by Jesus Christ there are â—now who can inform him rather than that woeful gloss upon them his Doctrine is called Grace because accompanyed with such Excellent Promises and may well be called Truth because so agreeable to the Natural Notions of Good and Evil which is the Confession of the Pelagian unbelief but these things are not my present concernment For the latter part of his Discourse in his opposition unto the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ as he doth not go about once to state or declare the sense wherein it is pleaded for nor produceth any one of the Arguments wherewith it is confirmed and omitteth the mention of most of the particular Testimonies which declare and establish it so as unto those few which he takes notice of he expresly founds his Answers unto them in that woful Subterfuge that if they are capable of another Interpretation or having another sense given unto them then nothing can be concluded from them to that purpose by which the Socinians seek to shelter themselves from all the Testimonies that are given to his Deity and Satisfaction But I have no concernment as I said either in his Opinions or his way of Reasoning and do know that those who have so need not desire a better Cause nor an easier Adversary to deal withall In his third Section pag. 279. he enters upon his exceptions unto the Union of Believers unto Jesus Christ and with great modesty at the entrance of his Discourse tells us First how these men with whom he hath to doe have fittted the Person of Christ unto all the wants and necessities of the sinner which yet if he denies God himself to have done he is openly injurious unto his Wisdom and Grace The very first Promise that was given concerning him was that he should save sinners from all their wants evils and miseries that might did or could befall them by the entrance of sin But thus it falls out when men will be talking of what they doe not understand Again he adds how he hath Explained the Scripture Metaphors whereby the Union between Christ and Christians is represented but that these men in stead of explaining of those Metaphors turn all Religion into an Allegory But what if one should now tell him that his Explanation of these Metaphors is the most absurd and irrational and argues the most fulsome ignorance of the Mystery of the Gospel that can be imagined and that on the other side those whom he traduceth doe explain them unto the understanding and experience of all that believe and that in a way suited and directed unto by the Holy Ghost himself to farther their Faith Obedience and Consolation as far as I perceive he would be at no small loss how to relieve himself under this censure The first thing he begins withal and wherein in the first place I fall under his Displeasure is about the Conjugal Relation between Christ and Believers which he treats of pag. 280. As for Example saith he Christ is called an Husband the Church his Spouse and now all the invitations of the Gospel are Christ's wooing and making love to his Spouse and what other men call believing the Gospel of Christ whereby we devote our selves to his Service these men call that consent and contract which makes up the Marriage betwixt Christ and Believers Christ takes us for his Spouse and we take Christ for our Husband and that with all the Solemnities of Marriage except the Ring which is left out as an Antichristian Ceremony Christ saying thus This is that we will consent unto that I will be for thee and thou shalt be for me and not for another Christ gives himself to the Soul with all his Excellencies Righteousness Preciousness Graces and Eminencies to be its Saviour Head and Husband to dwell with it in this Holy Relation and the Soul likes Christ for his Excellencies Graces Suitableness farr above all other Beloveds whatsoever and accepts of Christ by the Will for its Husband Lord and Saviour And thus the Marriage is compleated and this is the Day of Christs Espousals and of the Gladness of his Heart
and now follow all mutual conjugal Affections which on Christs part consist in Delight Valuation Pity Compassion Bounty on the Saints part in Delight Valuation Chastity Duty But I have already corrected this fooling with Scripture Metaphors and Phrases It might perhaps not unbecome this Author to be a little more sparing of his Correction unless his Authority were more then it is and his skill also in the mannagement of it For at present those whom he attempts upon are altogether insensible of any Effects of his severity But whereas he seems much at a loss how to evidence his own Wisdom any other way than by calling them Fools with whom he hath to do it is sufficient to plead his Excuse But what is it that he is here so displeased at as unfit for a Man of his Wisdom to bear withal and therefore calls it Fooling Is it that there is a conjugal Relation between Christ and the Church That he is the Bridegroom and Husband of the Church and that the Church is his Bride and Spouse That he becomes so unto it by a voluntarily Gracious Act of his Love and that the Church enters into that Relation with him by their acceptance of him in that Relation voluntarily giving up themselves unto him in Faith Love and Obedience suited thereunto Is it that he loveth his Church and cherisheth it as an Husband Or that the Church gives up it self in chaste and holy obedience unto him as her Spouse Or is it my way and manner of expressing these things wherewith he is so provoked If it be the latter I desire he would for his own satisfaction take notice that I contemn his censures and appeal to the Judgment of those who have more understanding and experience in these things than for ought I can discern by his Writings he hath yet attained unto If it be the former they are all of them so proved and confirmed from the Scripture in that very Discourse which he excepteth against as that he is not able to answer or reply one serious word thereunto Indeed to deny it is to renounce the Gospel and the Catholick Faith It is therefore to no purpose for me here to go over again the Nature of this Relation between Christ and the Church wherein really and truly it doth consist what it is the Scripture instructeth us in thereby what is that Love Care Tenderness of Christ which it would have us thence to Learn and what is our own duty with respect thereunto together with the Consolation thence arising the whole of this work is already discharged in that discourse which these impertinent Cavils are raised against and that suitably to the sence of the Church in all Ages and of all sound Expositors of those very many places of Scripture which I have urged and insisted on to that purpose Let him if he please a little lay aside the severity of his Corrections and befooling of Men and answer any Material passage in the whole discourse if he be able or discover any thing in it not agreeable to the Analogy of Faith or the sence of the Ancient Church if he can And though he seem both here and in some of his ensuing pages to have a particular 〈◊〉 of what is cited or improved ou◠of the Book of Canticles to this purpose yet if he either deny that that whole Book doth mystically express the conjugal Relation that is between Christ and his Church with their mutual affections and delight in each other or that the places particularly insisted on by me are not duly applyed unto their proper intention I can at least confirm them both by the Authority of such persons as whose Antiquity and Learning will exercise the utmost of his confidence in calling them Fools for their pains From hence for sundry Pages he is pleased to give me a little respite whilest he diverts his severity unto another unto whose Will and Choyce what to doe in it I shall leave his peculiar Concern as knowing full well how easie it is for him to vindicate what he hath written on this Subject from his impertinent Exceptions if he please In the mean time if this Author supposeth to adde unto the Reputation of his Ingenuity and Modesty by assaulting with a few pitifull Cavils a Book written with so much Learning Judgement and Moderation as that is which he excepts against not daring in the mean time to contend with it in any thing of the Expository or the Argumentative part of it but only to discover a malevolent desire to obstruct the use which it hath been of and may yet further be to the Church of God I hope he will not find many Rivals in such a Design For my part I do suppose it more becoming Christian Modesty and Sobriety where men have laboured according to their Ability in the Explication of the Mysteries of Christian Religion and that with an avowed intention to promote Holiness and Gospel Obedience to accept of what they have attained wherein we can come unto a Complyance with them then passing by whatever we cannot but approve of or are not able to disprove to make it our Business to cavil at such Expressions as either we do not like or hope to pervert and abuse to their disadvantage Pag. 296. he returns again to my Discourse and fiercely pursues it for sundry Leafs in such a Manner as becomes him and is usual with him That part of my Book which he deals withall is from pag. 176. unto pag. 187. And if any person of Ingenuity and Judgement will be pleased but to peruse it and to compare it with this mans Exceptions I am secure it will need no farther Vindication but as it is represented in his Cavilling way it is impossible for any man either to conceive what is the true Design of my Discourse or what the Arguments wherewith what I assert is confirmed which he doth most unduely pretend to give an Account of For he so chops and changes and alters at his pleasure going backwards and forwards and that from one thing to another without any regard unto a Scholastick or Ingenuous Debate of any thing that might be called a Controversie meerly to seek out an Appearance of Advantage to vent his cavilling Exceptions as no Judgement can Rationally be made of his whole Discourse but only that he had a mind to have cast Aspersions on mine if he had known how But such stuffe as it is we must now take the Measure of it and consider of what Use it may be And first he quotes those words from my Book That Christ fulfilled all Righteousness as he was Mediator and that whatever he did as Mediator he did it for them whose Mediator he was or in whose stead and for whose Good he executed the Office of a Mediator before God and hence it is that his compleat and perfect Obedience to the Law is reckoned to us He addes This is well said if it were