else a Righteousness without Works signifies a Righteousness without the Perfection of Works and therefore the Apostle makes a Righteousness without Works the same with an imputed Righteousness and both of them to consist in forgiveness of sins even as David also describeth the blessedness of that man to whom the Lord imputeth Righteousness without Works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered So that forgiveness of sins which supposeth an imperfect and defective Righteousness if we will believe our Apostle is a description of Righteousness without Works Upon the same account it is called Justifying the Ungodly vers 5. which can by no means signifie that God will justifie a wicked man while he continues wicked for this is a plain contradiction to the whole Gospel but it signifies that God will justifie those who though they have been wicked which was the case of Abraham and the Gentile-World yet return to him by a hearty Repentance and a true lively Faith Justification by Works requires a perpetual Innocency and Blamelesness of Life for a man who ever was a Sinner can never be justified by Works in this sense because he can never be innocent again it being impossible that that should never have been which has been But now the Righteousness of Faith which consists in the forgiveness of sins makes him Righteous who has been a Sinner and is still an imperfect Saint not that such a man never was a Sinner but that God doth not impute his sins to him This is the Apostles account of Evangelical Righteousness and Justification that it is an imputed Righteousness a Righteousness without Works a Justifying the Ungodly or which is the sum of all that it consists in the Pardon of Sin And now let our Author tell the Apostle That this is to turn plain Scripture into Metaphors and that it is inconsistent with the Immutability and Essential Holiness of God But secondly I have something more to say to Mr. Ferguson which I suppose will be of some weight with him viz. That all the Reformed Churches are for that Metaphorical Justification which he rejects that is they place our Justification in the forgiveness of sin Thus the French Church declares in her Confession which Beza presented to Charles IX in the Name of that Church Credimus totam nostram justitiam positam esse in peccatorum nostrorum remissione quae sit etiam ut testatur David unica nosâ—â—a a selicitas i. e. We believe that our WHOLE RIGHTEOUSNESS consists in the pardon of our sins which also as David witnesseth is our ONLY Blessedness In sola Iesu Christi obedientia prorsus acquiescimus quae quidem nobis imputatur tum ut tegantur omnia nostra peccata tum etiam ut gratiam coram Deo naniscamur And we rest wholly in the Obedience of Jesus Christ which is imputed to us both that all our sins may be covered and that we may obtain grace and favour with God By which last words we learn what they and other Protestant Churches mean by the Imputation of Christs Righteousness and resting on the Obedience and Righteousness of Christ not that his Righteousness is so imputed to us as to make us formally righteous and to answer the demands of the Law which exacts an unsinning Obedience but it is so imputed to us that for the sake of Christ God forgives our sins and receives us into favour Thus the Helvetian Confession tells us Iustificare significat Apostolo in disputatione de Iustificatione peccata remittere à culpa poena absolvere in gratiam recipere justum pronunciare To justifie according to the Apostles sense of it in his dispute of Justification signifies to forgive sins to absolve from guilt punishment to receive into a state of favour and to pronounce such a person just and righteous that is not just as an innocent but as a pardon'd man Nor is the Scotch-Confession more Orthodox in this point For giving an account of those benefits we receive by the Satisfaction and Righteousness of Christ it sums them up in this Deus Pater nos in corpore Iesu Christi Filii sui intuetur imperfectam nostram obedientiam quasi perfectam acceptat omniaque opera nostra quae in se multis maculis foedantur perfecta justitia filii sui tegit i. e. God the Father beholds us as Members of Christs Body accepts our imperfect Obedience as if it were perfect and covers all our works which in themselves are defiled with many spots and blemishes with the perfect Righteousness of his Son So that according to the sense of this Church to which our Author ought to pay some Reverence we are not acquitted and absolved as innocent Persons by the Imputation of Christs perfect Righteousness but for Christs sake God accepts our imperfect Obedience as if it were perfect and covers all the imperfections and defects of our Works with the perfect Righteousness of his Son that is pardons all our sins for the sake of Christs perfect Righteousness The Augustan Confession is very express in this matter and so is their Apology Consequi remissionem peccatorum est justificari juxta illud beati quorum remissae sunt iniquitates To obtain the pardon of sin is to be justified according to that saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven Thus the Churches of Bohemia declare their sense Per Christum homines gratis fide in Christum per misericordiam justificari salutem remissionem peccatorum consequi That to be justified is to obtain the pardon of sin and salvation freely by Christ. Thus we read in the Dutch Confession Credimus omnem felicitatem nostram sitam esse in peccatorum nostrorum remissione quae est in Christo Iesu eaque unica totam nostram justitiam coram Deo contineri We believe that our whole Happiness consists in the forgiveness of sins which is by Jesus Christ and that in this alone consists our WHOLE Righteousness before God And to conclude with our own Church in the Homily of Salvation we are taught that our Iustification consists in the forgiveness of sin and that this Iustification and Righteousness which we so receive of Gods Mercy and Christs Merits is taken accepted and allowed of God for our perfect and full Iustification I do not urge the Consent of Reformed Churches as if I thought their Authority sufficient to determine us in this matter they had no Authority but Reason and Scripture nor did they pretend to any other which is the true Principle of the Protestant Reformation There are but three sorts of Authority of any moment in Religion viz. The Authority of Divine Inspiration the Authority of Testimony and the Authority of Discipline and Order The Authority of Divine Inspiration is peculiar to Christ and his Apostles who spoke by an Infallible Spirit and is now confined to the holy Scriptures which are the only Infallible Rule of
are essential to justifying Faith and it is not justifying Faith without them such as Repentance and Contrition without which no Faith is a true justifying Faith and therefore we may observe in our Homilies that sometimes Faith is made an essential part of Repentance sometimes Repentance is made essential to a justifying Faith as appears from what I have discoursed above The reason of the mistake is this That these men do not distinguish between the general notion of Faith and Iustifying Faith Faith in general as it signifies a belief of the Being and Providence of God and the Truth of the Scriptures c. is necessary to produce any good Actions for without Faith it is impossible to please God but this bare Assent of the Understanding is not justifying Faith till it excite in us a hearty sorrow for our sins and sincere purposes of a New Life and a great Trust and Affiance in the Mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ So that Repentance and the Purpose of a New Life are at least essential to justifying Faith and not the fruits and effects of it but the actual performance of these Vows and Promises and the faithful discharge of our Duty to God and Men in a holy and blameless Life may be called the effects of justifying Faith not that they are not as necessary to a justifying Faith as Repentance is but because our Justification is begun without them God in infinite Grace and Mercy receiving us into favour upon our first return to him though these good Works must necessarily follow to compleat and perfect our Justification as it is expresly observed from St. Chrysostom in the Homily of Good Works concerning the Thief upon the Cross that if he had lived and not regarded Faith and the Works thereof he should have lost his Salvation again And in this sense we are told in the Homily of Salvation That Faith doth not shut out the justice of our Good Works necessarily to be done afterwards that is after our Justification of Duty towards God And upon the same account our Church in her XII Article teaches us That Good Works are the Fruits of Faith and follow those who are Iustified And this gives an easie and plain account of the XIII Article of our Church which rejects those Works which are done before Justification that is before a Iustifying Faith as is plain from the Article Works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasant to God forasmuch as they spring not of Faith in Iesus Christ neither do they make men meet to receive Grace or as the School-Authors say deserve Grace of Congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done we doubt not but that they have the nature of Sin The plain meaning of which is this That Works done before Justifying Faith are not pleasing to God that is whatever Works we do before we repent of our sins and purpose to live a New Life and trust in the Mercy of God and Merits of our Saviour for Pardon and Acceptance cannot please God because such are not Good Works for when we reject Works done before Justification we must not reject Justifying Faith it self nor any thing which is necessary and essential to it for then we run our selves into such a Labyrinth out of which we shall never find a way And indeed I find that some men are very sensible what weight our Church lays upon the necessity of Repentance in order to our Justification and use some little Arts to avoid it for that Description of Faith which is given us in the first part of the Sermon of Faith concluding thus We do trust that our offences be continually washed and purged whensoever we repenting truly do return to him with our whole heart stedfastly determining with our selves through his Grace to obey and serve him in keeping his Commandments and never to turn back again to sin Which maks Repentance of our sins and a sincere and stedfast purpose of a new life antecedently necessary to the justfying Act of Faith they use this evasion that the Homily adds Whensoever we repenting return to him either with respect to future sins to the forgiveness of which we all acknowledge Repentance to be necessary or else to distinguish a saving from a counterfeit and sudden Faith not as if true Evangelical Repentance had any influence upon the very Act of Iustification as Faith has The first account is the strangest that ever I met with for there can be no imaginable reason assigned why Repentance should be necessary to obtain the Pardon of those sins which we commit after Justification and not necessary to our first Justification I am sure neither the Scripture nor the Articles and Homilies of our Church nor the Confessions of any Reformed Churches which I ever yet saw ever made such a distinction The Commission which our Saviour gave to his Apostles was to preach Repentance and Forgiveness of sins in his Name to the unconverted and unjustified Jews and Heathens and both the Homilies of our Church and the Augustan-Confession do in express words found the Doctrine of Repentance upon that first Commission given to the Apostles and do thence conclude the necessity of Repentance in order to Forgiveness for since Justification consists in the forgiveness of our sins a repeated Forgiveness is but a repeated Justification of a Sinner and why that should be necessary to the after-acts of Justification which was not necessary to the first is beyond my Understanding The second account is much better that it is to distinguish between a saving and a counterfeit Faith but then this very distinction confirms the antecedent necessity of Repentance to Justification for the difference between a saving and counterfeit Faith according to this Account is that a saving Faith supposes Repentance or includes it in its very nature but a counterfeit Faith does not as for what they add that Evangelical Repentance hath not such an influence upon our Justification as Faith has is none of our present dispute if it be but acknowledged to be antecedently necessary we will consider the rest hereafter And now it is time to proceed to the last thing I proposed to consider what our Church attributes to Faith in the matter of our Justification And to state this matter plainly I shall first enquire in what sense our Church rejects Works from the Office of Justifying and attributes it to Faith alone And secondly what the Office of Faith is in the Justification of a Sinner First In what sense our Church rejects Works from the Office of Justifying and attributes it to Faith alone And it is easily observed that our Church acknowledges the antecedent necessity of some Works to our Justification as we are expresly taught in the first part of the Sermon of Salvation And yet that Faith doth not shut out Repentance Hope Love Dread
and the Fear of God to be joyned with Faith in every man that is justified but it shutteth them out from the Office of Iustifying So that although they be all present together in him that is justified yet they justifie not all together So that no man must expect this great Blessing of Justification unless together with Faith he have Repentance Hope Love Dread and the Fear of God which supposes that a man must be a true Penitent and a true Lover of God before he is justified Though Repentance and Hope c. have no actual influence upon our Justification yet they are causae sine quibus non such causes without which the effect will never follow which necessarily intitles them to the nature of Conditions for a Condition which hath no natural or meritorious Efficiency is only a causa sine quâ non and though it is true that the accidental presence of one thing with another which produces any Effect will not entitle it to any degree of Efficiency yet where there is such a natural Union between two things that neither of them can act alone though the effect may more immediately belong to one than to the other yet they both concur to it though the hand does immediately apprehend any thing or lay hold on it yet the Shoulder and the Arm is naturally necessary to produce this action because the Hand cannot move of it self And if they will allow us this similitude which they themselves sometimes use that Good VVorks be the Shoulder and Arm that upholds Faith we will allow Faith to be the Hand And thus it is in Moral Causes where the presence of two things of Faith suppose and Works is necessarily required in order to the same Effect there must be a concurrence of both though it may be in different manners When our Church asserts the necessary presence of some internal Graces and Vertues together with Faith in him who is to be justified she plainly acknowledges that we shall never be justified without them though not for them which is all that any one desires who denies and rejects the Merits of Good Works And as these internal Acts of Repentance Hope c. are antecedently necessary to Justification so Good Works must necessarily follow as we are taught in the same place Nor the Faith also doth not shut out the Iustice of our Good Works necessarily to be done afterwards of Duty towards God for we are most bounden to serve God in doing Good Deeds commanded by him in his holy Scripture all the days of our Life but it excludeth them so that we may not do them to this intent to be made good by doing of them that is to be justified by them And this we are taught is so necessary that unless these Good Works follow as the necessary Fruits of Faith we shall loose our Justification again as you heard above In what sense then does our Church reject good Works and attribute our Justification to Faith alone And that we are told over and over in the most plain and express words that it is only to take away the Merit of Good Works and to attribute our Justification to the free Mercy of God and Merits of Christ not to our own Works and Deservings Hence it is that Justification by Works is so often opposed to our Justification by the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ which are inconsistent in no other sense but that of Merit for though Good Works be supposed the necessary Conditions of Justification yet if they be acknowledged so imperfect as not to merit we shall still need the Merits of Christ to expiate our sins and the Mercy of God to pardon them and to accept of our imperfect Services But the words of the Homily are very express where after alledging the concurrent Testimonies of the ancient Fathers for Justification without Works by Faith alone we have this Explication given of them Nevertheless this Sentence that we be justified by Faith only is not so meant of them that the said Justifying Faith is alone in man without true Repentance Hope Charity Dread and Fear of God at any time and season nor when they say we be justified freely they mean not that we should or might afterward be idle and that nothing should be required on our parts afterward neither they mean not so to be justified without Good Works that we should do no Good Works at all But this saying that we be justified by Faith only freely and without Works is spoken for to take away clearly all Merit of our Works as being unable to deserve our Justification at Gods hands and thereby most plainly to express the weakness of Man and the goodness of God the great infirmity of our selves and the might and power of God the imperfectness of our own Works and the most abundant Grace of our Saviour Christ and therefore wholly to ascribe the Merit and Deserving of our Justification to Christ only and his most precious blood-shedding Hence for a man to be justified by his own Works is expounded as if we should affirm That a man might by his own Works take away and purge his own sins and so justifie himself That is when they reject Justification by Works they understand by it a meritorious Justification Thus in the third part of the Sermon of Salvation we are expresly taught That the true meaning of this Proposition or Saying We be justified by Faith in Christ only according to the meaning of the old ancient Authors is this We put our Faith in Christ that we be justified by him only that we be justified by Gods free Mercy and the Merits of our Saviour Christ only and by no vertue or Good Works of our own that is in us or that we can be able to have or to do for to deserve the same Christ himself only being the Cause meritorious thereof This is so expresly the Doctrine of the Homilies that I need not multiply Testimonies for the proof of it from whence it is evident that our Church owns the necessity of Good Works to all intents and purposes excepting Merit and in this sense they reject Faith too as it is our own Work But now because our Church and all the Reformed Churches expresly reject Works in the matter of Justification under the notion of Merit and Deserving in which sense alone they are injurious to the Grace of God and the Merits of Christ from whence we argue that they own the necessity of Works upon all other Accounts and reject only the Merit of them Some tell us that we should rather argue that they put no difference between Works and the Merit of Works in the matter of Justification but equally reject them both But pray why so Truly for no Reason that I know but that it best serves their Hypothesis They acknowledge that there is a difference between Works and the Merit of Works but will by no means own that
to this Argument is to find what there is to be answered To be justified by Works without Merit if any men phrase it so can signifie no more but this that God for Christs sake forgives the sins and accepts the Persons of those who though they be guilty of many Infirmites yet do heartily and sincerely endeavour to please him and by the practise of a real Righteousness do every day aspire after a greater likeness to him now the question is Why since these men do not merit such favours should God prefer them before those who busie themselves in some external Rites and Ceremonies or Judaical Observances which have no real Goodness in them And I can give no other account of it but that it is for the same reason for which God prefers an Evangelical before a Ceremonial Righteousness and if there be no reason for this excepting Merit I confess the Argument is unanswerable Is there no reason why God should prefer the internal Habits of Grace and Vertue which are a participation of his own Nature and the beginnings though but weak and imperfect of a new and spiritual Life and the best qualifications for future Glory and Happiness before some external Rites and Usages which have no real worth Is there no reason why God should prefer the substantial Acts of Piety and Charity which are useful to Men and an imitation of the bounty and goodness of God before picking up straws and such useless and ludicrous Employments Is there no difference between Works which are imperfectly good and Works which have no goodness in them But I think it is a Work of Supererogation though not very meritorious to answer such an Argument But now in requital of this Argument against the distinction between Works and Merit I shall give another for it and that is That our Church makes nothing more necessary on our part to our Salvation than to our Justification and therefore when she rejects Good Works from the Office of Justifying if she intends to deny the Necessity as well as the Merit of Good Works she must be understood to deny the necessity of Good Works to our Salvation also which is an express Contradiction to her declared Doctrine There is no such distinction as this between Justification and Salvation to be found in any of the Articles or Homilies of our Church which is a good Argument that our Church knew no such distinction for if she had we cannot but think that she would have made use of it in express terms at one time or other there being the same occasion for it then that there is now The Sermon or Homily of Justification is called the Sermon of Salvation and these words Iustification and Salvation are promiscuously used in the Homily it self Thus in the third part of the Sermon of Salvation we have these words at the beginning It hath been manifestly declared unto you that no man can fulfil the Law of God and therefore by the Law all men are condemned whereupon it followeth necessarily that some other thing should be required for our SALVATION than the Law and that is a true and lively Faith in Christ bringing forth good Works and a Life according to Gods Commandments Where Salvation must of necessity signifie what at other times is called Justification for our Church tells us that we cannot be saved by the Works of the Law because we cannot fulfil the Law which is the reason at other times assigned why we cannot be Iustified by the Law Because all men be Sinners and Offenders against God and Breakers of his Law therefore can no man by his own Acts Words and Deeds seem they never so good be justified and made righteous before God Which are the very first words of the Sermon of Salvation And what is here required for our Salvation is the very same which in other places our Church requires to our Justification viz. A true and lively Faith in Christ bringing forth Good Works and a Life according to Gods Commandments Thus in the first part of the Sermon of Good Works our Church cites those words of S. Chrysostom I can shew a man that by Faith without Works lived came to heaven but without Faith never any man had Life the Thief that was hanged when Christ suffered did believe only and the most merciful God justified him this is an Example of living and going to Heaven by Faith without Works that the Thief was justified by Faith only so that to be justified by Faith and to live and go to Heaven by Faith it seems are equivalent expressions as appears also from what follows And because no man shall say again that he lacked time to do good VVorks for else he would have done them Truth it is and I will not contend therein but this I will surely affirm that Faith only SAVED him So that to be justified and to be saved by Faith still signifies the same thing and in the same sense wherein our Church affirms that we may be justified by Faith only she affirms that we may be saved by Faith only which therefore must not exclude the Necessity but the Merit of Good Works and whenever Faith only will not justifie it will not save neither as it follows If he had lived and not regarded Faith and the Works thereof he should have lost his Salvation again That is his Justification as appears from the whole Discourse The Learned Bishop Davenant certainly was not acquainted with this distinction when he proposed that Question Utrum bona Opera sint necessaria ad Iustificationem vel Salutem Whether Good Works be necessary to Justification or Salvation and answers it without making any difference between their necessity to Justification and to Salvation which is not very reconcileable with our Modern Divinity in which good Works are so far from being owned necessary that they are judged dangerous and hurtful in reference to Justification though they may be necessary to our Salvation And indeed this distinction between Justification and Salvation was on purpose invented to mollifie some harsh expressions of later Divines who rejected good Works and a holy Life from having any thing to do in the Justification of a Sinner This gave birth to the Antinomian Heresie which wholly rejects the Law and good VVorks and under a pretence of advancing the freeness of Gods Grace delivers Believers from all the necessary Obligations of Duty and Obedience to prevent the infection of this Doctrine they invented this distinction between Justification and Salvation and asserted that though Good VVorks are not necessary to our Justification yet they are to our Salvation which is as much as to say that though our sins shall be pardoned and our persons accepted and accounted perfectly righteous and have an actual Right and Title to future Glory without Holiness and Obedience yet we shall never have an actual Possession of Glory but upon the condition of an holy Life which were it true
would be a greater blemish to the VVisdom and Justice of God than the necessity of Holiness to our Justification can be to the freeness of his Grace Having explained in what sense our Church rejects Good VVorks from the Office of Justifying viz. That nothing which we can do is so perfect as to merit and deserve Justification it is time to consider what our Church attributes to Faith in the Justification of a Sinner and upon what account she affirms That Faith only justifies And I cannot better explain this than in the words of the Homily it self which are these Truth it is that our own Works do not justifie us to speak properly of Iustification that is to say our Works do not merit or deserve remission of our sins and make us of unjust just before God But God of his own Mercy through the only Merits Deservings of his Son Iesus Christ doth justifie us Nevertheless because Faith doth directly send us to Christ for remission of our sins and that by Faith given us of God we embrace the Promise of Gods Mercy and of the remission of our sins which thing none other of our Vertues or Works properly doth therefore Scripture useth to say That Faith without VVorks doth justifie and forasmuch that it is all one Sentence in effect to say Faith without Works and only Faith doth justifie us therefore the old ancient Fathers of the Church from time to time have uttered our Iustification with this speech Only Faith justifieth us meaning none other thing than St. Paul meant when he said Faith without works justifieth us And because all this is brought to pass through the only Merits and Deservings of our Saviour Christ and not through our Merits or through the merit of any Vertue that we have within us or of any Work that cometh from us therefore in that respect of Merit and Deserving we forsake as it were altogether again Faith Works and all other Vertues For our own imperfection is so great through the corruption of original sin that all is unperfect that is within 〈◊〉 Faith Charity Hope Dread Thoughts Words and Works and therefore not apt to merit or deserve any part of our Iustification for us And this form of speaking use we in humbling of our selves to God and to give all the Glory to our Saviour Christ which is best worthy to have it These words are so plain that they need no comment and there are three things contained in them which do evidently declare the sense of our Church in this matter First That our Church does not attribute our Justification to Faith upon account of any Merit or Desert in Faith above other Vertues and Graces for in respect of Merit and Deserving we are taught to forsake again Faith it self as well as Works and all other Vertues As our Works do not merit or deserve remission of our sins no more does Faith Secondly That the reason why our Church attributes our Justification to Faith only is to declare that we owe our Justification wholly to the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ That God of his own Mercy through the only Merits and Deservings of his Son Iesus Christ doth justifie us And thus immediately before we are told That the meaning of this Proposition or saying We be justified by Faith in Christ only according to the meaning of the old ancient Authors is this we put our Faith in Christ that we be justified by him only that we be justified by Gods free Mercy and the Merits of our Saviour Christ only and by no vertue or good VVorks of our own that is in us or that we can be able to have or to do for to deserve the same Christ himself only being the Cause meritorious thereof So that whoever attributes the Justification of a Sinner wholly to the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ without any other intervening Merit or Desert though he may differ in the phrase and manner of expression yet does acknowledge all that our Church means by being justified by Faith only and cannot justly be charged with deserting or opposing the Doctrin of our Church And therefore Thirdly the true Reason why our Church attributes our Justification to Faith only and not to Justice or Charity or the Love of God or any other Grace or Virtue is this because Faith only connects the necessity of Obedience and a Holy Life with the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ and thereby both secures and enforces our Duty and attributes the glory of all to Free Grace which is the great design of our Church For Justifying Faith according to the sense of our Church as abundantly appears from what I have discoursed above includes in its own nature Repentance and the Love of God and the sincere purposes of a new Life which as opportunity serves must actually produce all the Fruits of Righteousness for without this we cannot embrace the Promise of Pardon and Forgiveness which is made upon the condition of Repentance and a new Life But then it is the proper office of Faith when we have done our best to depend upon the Mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ to pardon our many sins and defects and to accept and reward our imperfect services which attributes the glory of all not to our Merits and Deserts but to the Grace and Mercy of God Thus our Church tells us that the reason why Faith only is said to justifie is because Faith doth directly send us to Christ for Remission of our Sins and that by Faith given us of God we embrace the Promise of Gods Mercy and of the Remission of our Sins which thing none other of our Virtues or Works properly doth That is Justice or Charity or any other Virtue doth not in its own nature include a dependence on the Grace and Mercy of God for its Acceptance and Reward and therefore should we be justified by these Virtues considered as distinct from Faith which alone embraces the Promise of Mercy we must be justified by their proper Merit and Desert not by the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ. But now Faith is not only an active and vigorous Principle of a new Life but in its own nature includes a necessary dependence on the Promise of Pardon it sends to Christ for the Remission of our sins not immediately for this is not the first act of Faith but when we have done our best it teaches us to renounce the Merit of our own Works and to trust in the Mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ for our Pardon and Reward which ascribes the Praise of all to the Mercy of God Upon the same account our Church tells us that Faith doth not shut out Repentance Love Dread and the Fear of God to be joyned with Faith in every man that is justified but yet it shutteth them out from the office of Iustifying so that though they be all present in
him that is justified yet they justifie not all together Where by these good Works being joyned with Faith and being present in him that is justified is meant that they are essential to a Justifying Faith and must be present as antecedent qualifications or conditions without which God will not justifie us as appears from what I have discourst above concerning the nature of Justifying Faith which includes Repentance and the Love of God c. as antecedently necessary to our embracing the Promise of Pardon and Forgiveness which is not the first but the last and completing act of Faith For if these good Works be not one way or other necessary to our Justification no reason can be assigned why they should be present in him that is justified for Faith might then justifie alone without the Presence as well as without the Merit and Efficacy of our good Works And therefore when Faith is said to shut out these good Works from the office of Iustifying that though they be all present yet they do not justifie all together the design is not to deny the Necessity but the Merit of good Works This is plain from the Reason which is immediately assigned why these good Works cannot justifie because all the good Works we can do be imperfect and therefore not able to deserve our Iustification which is the constant Doctrin of the Homilies For our Church by Justification perpetually understands a meritorious and not a conditional Justification and therefore whatever justifies in this sense must by its own Virtue or Merit expiate our sins which is the reason alledged why no man can make himself righteous that is justifie himself by his own Works neither in part nor in the whole for that were the greatest Presumption in Man that Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his own Works take away and purge his own sins and so justifie himself SO that is by the Merit and Virtue of his own Works And Faith it self considered as our own Act hath no greater privilege upon this account than any other Grace or Virtue for in respect of Merit and Deserving we forsake altogether again Faith Works and all other Virtues Faith does not justifie as our own Act that is it does not merit our Justification as it must do if it justifie as our own Act which in the sense of our Church signifies that we do something so meritorious as to deserve Justification at Gods hands But now Iustification is the office of God only and is not a thing which we render to him that is we can offer him nothing of our own to merit our Justification but which we receive from him not which we give to him but which we take of him by his free Mercy and by the only Merits of his dearly beloved Son our only Redeemer Iustifier and Saviour Iesus Christ. But for this reason Faith only is said to justifie and to shut out our own Works and itself also considered as our own Act from the office of justifying because though it strongly enforce the Necessity of good Works yet in its own nature it excludes all opinion of Merit and Desert For Faith has a necessary respect to the Promise of Mercy and Forgiveness and whoever acknowledges that he ows his Justification to the Mercy of God who for the sake of Christ pardons his Sins and rewards his Imperfect Services as all those must do who hope to be saved by Faith in the notion of our Church does plainly confess that his Works are imperfect and cannot deserve his Justification which takes away all opinion of Merit from our selves and attributes the glory of all to the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ. I shall only observe three things from this Discourse which are very material to our present purpose First that our Church was not acquainted with that Distinction in the modern sense of it that we are justified fide solâ but not solitariâ by Faith alone but not by that Faith which is alone the meaning of which according to some Modern Divines is this That we are justified only by that particular Act of Faith which apprehends the Righteousness of Christ and relies and rolls itself on Christ for Salvation and applies his Merits and Righteousness to the Soul without any regard to Repentance and the Love of God or any other Grace or Virtue That though at the same time God infuse the habits of all Graces and Virtues into a justified person yet in the Act of justifying he hath no regard at all to Repentance or any other Grace but we are justified in order of nature before these are infused into us and without any respect to them And some men would willingly affix this Notion as absurd as it is to our Church because she only requires the presence of these Graces and Virtues in the justified person but shuts them out from the office of Justifying But I have made it appear that these words admit a better sense and that Justification by Faith only in the modern Notion of it so as to exclude the antecedent Necessity of Repentance or any other internal Grace or Virtue is contrary to the constant doctrin of our Church which requires the presence of these Graces as antecedent conditions or qualifications though it shut them out from being the meritorious Causes of Justification And to confirm this I observe secondly that our Church doth not attribute our Justification to any particular Act of Faith She frequently indeed inculcates the embracing of the Promise of Pardon and Forgiveness as essential to a justifying Faith but the reason of that is not because that particular Act justifies us but to attribute our Justification not to the Merit of our own works but to the Mercy of God But she expresly affirms that Faith doth not justifie as our own Act that Justification is not the office of Man but of God and if we be not justified by Faith as our own Act much less can any particular Act of Faith which if it be considered as an Act must be considered as our own Act justifie which overthrows that Instrumentality of Faith in Justification which these men talk of but the plain meaning of our being justified by Faith only is this that God will pardon our sins and reward us with eternal life if we repent of our sins and believe and obey the Gospel of his Son trusting wholly in the Mercies of God and in the Merits and Mediation of our Lord Jesus Christ as it is exprest at large in the Homily That the true understanding and meaning of our being justified by Faith without Works or by Faith in Christ only is this that although we hear Gods Word and believe it although we have Faith Hope Charity and do never so many good Works thereunto yet we must renounce the Merit of all the said Virtues of Faith Hope Charity and all other Virtues and good deeds which
Salvation by receiving Christ by resting and relying and rolling on Christ There is no use of Repentance or Charity or the Love of God in this affair for they cannot apply the Righteousness of Christ to us If we come to Christ for Righteousness we must come without any Righteousness of our own And yet it is hard to understand how this fiducial Reliance on Christ can apply his Righteousness to us a confident Persuasion that Christ is ours may make a fanciful application of his Righteousness to us but a mere Reliance on Christ makes no application but only signifies a Hope that it shall be applied And if they will be true to their Principles that we are justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to us which is God's act whereby he applies the Righteousness of Christ I cannot understand how we can be justified by applying his Righteousness to our selves by Faith which if it have any sense must signifie our imputing the Righteousness of Christ to our selves for the Righteousness of Christ can be applied to us only by Imputation which makes our Justification our own Act and not Gods For it is as absurd to the full to say that Faith is an Instrument in doing that which is intirely Gods act or that our Imputation of Christs Righteousness to our selves is an Instrument of Gods imputing his Righteousness to us And then it is worth considering which of these two Imputations must go first if we apply that is impute the Righteousness of Christ to our selves before God has imputed it this is a false Confidence and Presumption if God imputes it first then we are actually justified and there needs no Imputation or Application of Faith to make this Righteousness ours all that can be said in this case is what the Antinomians affirm that we are first justified before we believe and that Faith is only a Sign or Evidence not an Instrument of our Justification But to let pass the Absurdities of this Doctrin every one may perceive how different this notion is from the sense of the Church of England which does not attribute our Justification to Faith as our own Act much less to any particular Act of Faith but by Justification by Faith only intends no more than that God will pardon our sins if we repent of them and reform our Lives and trust in the Mercies of God through the Merits and Mediation of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the sense of our Church the sole object of our trust is the Mercy of God through the Merits of Christ and therefore the proper Act of Faith is to embrace the Promise of Pardon upon the conditions of Repentance and a new Life we must first repent of our sins and reform our Lives and then rely on the Mercy of God for our Pardon and Reward But according to this new Divinity the sole object of our trust and reliance is the perfect and personal Righteousness of Christ which shuts out the Mercy of God and the meritorious Death and Sacrifice of Christ and the Promises of Pardon and the necessity of an inherent and personal Righteousness as abundantly appears from what I have discourst above But fourthly whereas our Church makes Christ only the meritorious cause of our Justification but still requires on our part Faith and Repentance and the Love of God as antecedent conditions of our Justification these men found all our hopes of Justification immediately on the Person of Christ. Every good Christian hopes to be justified and saved by Christ but not to be immediately saved by Christ i. e. by a bare Union to his Person but by believing his Gospel and obeying his Laws which are necessarily required on our part to give us an Interest in his Merits and Righteousness but to assert that nothing is necessary to our Justification but to apply Christ and his Righteousness to our selves by a fiducial Reliance and Recumbency is to place our hopes immediately in the Person of Christ which is the foundation of Antinomianism For this reason among others I charged them in my former Discourse with setting up the Person of Christ in opposition to his Gospel and making a new Religion of the Person of Christ distinct from and contrary to the Religion of his Gospel For the Gospel requires a great many previous conditions to entitle us to the Merits and Righteousness of Christ as that we must repent of our sins and reform our Lives and become new Creatures and then God will pardon and reward us for the sake of Christ but if an immediate Application of the Righteousness of Christ to our selves by a fanciful and Enthusiastick Faith will make all Christ ours this makes all the conditions of the Gospel void and useless and sets up the Person of Christ and his Personal Righteousness instead of his Laws and Religion The Gospel attributes the Pardon of our sins and the Acceptance of our imperfect Services to the virtue and efficacy of Christs Sacrifice and Righteousness and thus we are made righteous by Christ as by a meritorious Cause But in this way the Righteousness of Christ must serve instead of a personal and inherent Righteousness which makes us so innocent that we need no Pardon and so perfectly righteous that we merit a Reward This I take to be the grand Miscarriage in these mens Divinity which indeed is the foundation of Antinomianism though the mistake be very taking and popular which makes an opposition to it very odious that whereas Christ is our Life and our Righteousness our Wisdom and Power and the Author of all spiritual Blessings but does not dispense these Blessings immediately to us but in such ways and methods and upon such terms and conditions as are prescribed and declared in the Gospel these men send us immediately to the Person of Christ for Life and Righteousness for Beauty and Comliness for Grace and Wisdom and for the supply of all our spiritual wants which shuts out his Gospel and Religion or makes it wholly useless and let but Dr. Owen stand to what he asserts in his Vindication We do not imagin but believe from the Scripture and with the whole Church of God that we receive Grace and Salvation from the Person of Christ in those distinct ways wherein they are capable of being received if by that he means such ways as are prescribed in the Gospel and I declare I have no controversie with him about this matter Thus for instance Christ is our Righteousness as he is the meritorious cause of the Pardon of our sins and the Acceptance of our sincere but imperfect services but the way to be made righteous by Christ is not immediately to go to Christ for Righteousness with all our sins and impurities about us to be cloathed with his perfect and personal Righteousness but to repent of our sins and to believe and obey the Gospel and then we shall be pardoned and rewarded for Christs sake Thus Christ is our
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 to our being holy our Election and Redemption is secure whether we be holy or not And so this cannot make Holiness necessary on our parts though it may be necessary on Gods part to make us holy but that is not our care This last Clause wherein the strength of the Argument lay the Doctor omits as not knowing what to answer but as for the rest cries out Wonderful Divinity again Methinks he should consider whose property it is so much to wonder But what is the reason of this wonder Why We are Elected and Redeemed with regard unto our own Holiness that is Antecedently to our Election and Redemption for Holiness being the Effect and Fruit of them is that which he opposes But pray Sir where do I oppose this Or what occasion had I to oppose it in this place My enquiry is only whether Election and Redemption include any necessary condition on our part without the performance of which we cannot lay claim to the benefits of them and whether Holiness be that Condition if they do not then our Election and Redemption can be no Argument on our part to live holily though it may be a sufficient reason for God to make us holy If they do then indeed Election and Redemption are a very necessary reason why we should live holily but such a reason as the Doctor dares not own Another reason which he assigned for the necessity of Holiness is That it is for our peace by it we have Communion with God wherein peace alone is to be enjoyed This is a very good Argument also in it self considered for if Holiness be the only way to enjoy peace and Communion with God there is an absolute necessity for every man who consults the peace of his Mind and the safety of his Soul to be holy as God is But this is not reconcilable with his darling Notion of Justification by the Righteousness of Christ only without any regard to our Holiness and Obedience for if we may be Justified without any respect to Holiness our Personal Righteousness cannot be necessary to our peace with God any more than it is to our Justification for all justified persons are in a state of peace and reconciliation with God And besides this I made it appear by two large quotations out of his Book of Communion that at other times he rejected our own Righteousness and Obedience and founded our Peace with God and Communion with him wholly and entirely on Christ and Justification by his Righteousness Here he expresses some indignation that I would offer to frame the appearance of a contradiction between what he saies 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 Bloud of Iesus Christ with the Remission of Sin and Iustification by Faith which ensue thereon and the necessity of Holiness and Fruitfulness in Obedience to maintain in our own Souls a sense of that peace with God which we have being justified by Faith Now though we should to bring him into a good humour again put the Controversie upon this Issue that our Peace with God is only to be obtained by the Atonement made by Christ and Justification by the imputation of his Righteousness but that the sense of this Peace with God is owing to Holiness and fruitfulness in Obedience yet I cannot see how to reconcile them For if nothing more be necessary to put us into a state of Peace and Friendship with God but the Atonement and Righteousness of Christ and we know that this alone and nothing else can do it How can our own Obedience and Righteousness which we know can contribute nothing to our Peace with God be necessary to give us a sense that is the knowledge of our Peace with God And therefore the Antinomians very agreeably to their own Principles which are the very same with the Doctor 's do reject our own Righteousness as well from being the Signs and Evidences as the Cause and Matter of our Peace with God And the Doctor and his Friends make Sanctification such a lame and imperfect Sign that we had as good have none as I have largely shewed in my former Discourse And though we should suppose Holiness to be a very good Sign and Evidence of our Peace with God yet this only makes Holiness necessary as a Sign not as our Duty It may be necessary on our part to our present Comfort not to our future Happiness And yet after all the Doctors swaggering I cannot understand that his words will bear this sense For in the first place he brings in a man enquiring after such a Righteousness as may be a sure foundation of hope and comfort and may settle and compose his mind with respect to a future judgment and shews the various ways men take in order to this That some labour to correct their Lives amend their ways perform the Duties required and so follow after Righteousness according to the Prescript of the Law And in this Course do many men continue long with much perplexity sometimes hoping oftner fearing sometimes ready to give quite over sometimes vowing to continue their Consciences being no ways satisfied nor Righteousness in any measure attained all their days So that here he rejects Holiness and Obedience correcting our Lives amending our Ways performing Duties from being able to give us a comfortable sense of our Peace with God this can by no means allay our Fears and satisfie our Consciences and I think no man who is a Christian who ever heard of Christs dying for our sins can understand this in any other sense than that our Holiness and Obedience is wholly useless not only to expiate our sins which every Christian knows to be the work of Christ and the Effect of his Death and Sufferings but to maintain any comfortable sense of the Pardon of our sins and the Love of God in our Souls I am sure he says the very same thing and assigns the very same reason for it which Dr. Crispe does and therefore there is some cause to think that they were of the same mind The Reasons Dr. Owen assigns why there is no hope no satisfaction of Conscience in correcting our Lives and performing Duties are first That men have already sinned and therefore there is a score and a reckoning upon them already which they know not how to answer for by their after Obedience That is their Righteousness though never so perfect cannot expiate past Offences Thus Dr. Crispe to the same purpose tells us The Christ is he that saves the Soul Christ is our Peace-maker that is by his Expiation and Atonement And as Christ is this
which makes all his Acts and Sufferings in a Law-sense accounted ours before he had laid too much weight and stress on this Argument he ought first to have proved that Christ acted as our Substitute in all that he did as well as suffered and he might have tried his Skill in answering those Arguments wherewith I have already assaulted that Notion but this is not his way it is more agreeable to his Genious and Capacity to dictate Magisterially than to prove Christ indeed died as a Sacrifice for our Sins and in this sense suffered in our stead but his suffering in our stead is a plain demonstration that his sufferings are not accounted ours any otherwise than as we receive the benefit of them in the expiation and forgiveness of our sins which is the proper effect of Sacrifices and redounds to them for whom the Sacrifice is offered which is all I can understand by any sufferings which are not ours being accounted ours in a Law-sense for any other sense implies a contradiction that any sufferings which are not under-gone by us but by another in our stead should be accounted ours any otherwise than as we receive the benefit and advantage of them And this is what the Learned Bishop Davenant understood by Imputation De facto imputantur extrinseca quando illorum intuitus respectus valent nobis ad aliquem effectum aequè ac si à nobis vel in nobis essent Then those things which are without us and do not properly belong to us are said to be imputed to us when with respect to them we are equally intitled to their effects as if they had been done by us or were inherent in us But such a Surrogationand Imputation will not satisfie Mr. Ferguson who must have the Righteousness of Christs Life and the Sacrifice of his Death otherwise imputed to us than meerly in the benefits of them Though any other imputation is impossible as implying a Thwacking Contradiction to use his own phrase Having thus got rid of these Objections in a fair Logical Way according to Mr. Ferguson's desire and not called but proved them all to be meer cavil and sophistry and vulgar talk I come now to the main Charge which he draws up against me of perverting the plainest Scriptures into Metaphors And in order to make good this Charge he premises two things First That to Iustifie is in its proper acceptation a forensick term signifying to acquit and absolve one that is acoused This I readily grant The second is That Iustification not only supposeth us to be indicted but withal imports an absolution from the Charge of that Law of the breach whereof we are accused I don't much care if I grant this too but then observe the consequence the Law which accuseth us is the Law of perfect and unsinning Obedience and therefore if we would be acquitted and absolved from the Accusation of the Law we must produce a perfect and unsinning Obedience for our Justification for to be pardoned is not a proper but a metaphorical Justification for in propriety of speech neither can an accused Innocent by being acquitted be said to be pardoned nor a condemned Criminal by having the execution of his sentence remitted be said to be justified So that to our proper Justification from the Sentence of the Law is necessarily required an Imputation of the perfect Righteousness of Christ to us to make us perfectly righteous but to place Justification in the Pardon of Sin as I do is to pervert plain Scripture into Metaphors for then Iustification as it is opposed to the accusation of the Law its charging us with guilt and its passing Sentence of Condemnation against us thereupon doth not admit a proper sense in the whole Scripture but must every where be construed metaphorically and that the import of it is that we are not properly and in a law-Law-sense justified but that such Benefits accrue to us by remission of sin as if we were so And now I pity our Author with all my heart for he hath run himself into a labyrinth out of which all his Art and Sophistry can never deliver him The only Foundation he has to bear up the weight of this Charge is That the Law of perfect and unsinning Obedience is still in force but I have already shewed the weakness and vanity of this pretence and how inconsistent it is with the Gospel-Covenant and therefore I need add no more in vindication of my self for take away this Law of perfect Obedience and Mr. Ferguson himself acknowledges that according to my notion in reference to the demands of the Gospel we may in a proper sense be said to be justified So that I am whole again all on a sudden and the only difference between Mr. Ferguson and my self is that he contends for the necessity of a legal Righteousness and Justification and I contend for an Evangelical Righteousness he is for being justified by the Personal Righteousness of Christ I am for being justified according to the gracious terms and conditions of the Gospel which are founded on the Merits and Righteousness of Christ. But let us suppose for once that this Law of perfect and unsinning Obedience is still in force and does accuse us and that our Justification must respect the Sentence of the Law what then Why then to place Justification in pardon of sin is to make it not a proper but metaphorical Justification and what then If this be the Scripture-notion of it I matter not whether it be proper or metaphorical the abuse of Scripture-expressions does not consist in expounding Scripture either to a proper or to a metaphorical sense but in wresting metaphorical and allusive expressions to a proper sense when they ought to be taken metaphorically and proper expressions to a metaphorical sense when they ought to be expounded to a proper sense And this Mr. Ferguson himself acknowledges when he gives some Rules for the Exposition of Scripture which are generally good when he transcribes them out of other men I call that says he the literal sense of Scripture which God doth intend in the words whether the words be taken properly or tropically That which ariseth from a figurative acceptation of the words is as truly a literal sense as that which flows from their proper acceptation And therefore he ought to have prov'd not only that I take Justification in a metaphorical sense but that the Scripture when it speaks of the Justification of a Sinner before God uses that word in a proper sense for Acquitting the Innocent which is a pretty odd way of Justifying a Sinner But here our Author is very silent and cannot give one instance of it only he tells us That in this sense it must be taken when declarative of the Act of God towards us as our Iudge or when set in opposition to condemnation or the curse of the Law to which we are obnoxious But what need of that
Does it not as much belong to a supreme and unaccountable Judge to pardon as to absolve And is not Pardon as properly opposed to Condemnation as Absolution is But to let all this pass it is worth considering how our Author in his way can explain Justification in a proper sense He tells us that the proper notion of Justification is to acquit and absolve the Innocent suppose this to be true though it may admit of some dispute whether this forensick use of the word be its proper sense I would willingly learn of our Author how a Sinner can be justified in this proper sense that is how he who hath broken the Laws of God can be acquitted and absolved as innocent how God who cannot lie can declare that that man hath never broken his Laws nor done any thing amiss who is a Sinner Yes says our Author this may be done very well by the imputation of the perfect Righteousness of Christ to Sinners which makes them perfectly innocent suppose this to be true yet is this the proper notion of Justification that a Sinner is innocent and righteous by Imputation Is there no difference then between an imputed and an inherent and personal Righteousness Justification in a proper sense requires a Personal Righteousness and Innocency and I doubt it will require some good lusty tropes to make an imputed Righteousness the matter of our Justification in this Law-notion So that for ought I can see the imputation of Righteousness in his gross notion is as metaphorical a Justification as the Pardon of sin though not half so good sense But I have not thus done with our Author There are three things more which I would desire him to consider at his leisure and to answer when he is able The first is this That Pardon of Sin whether it be a proper or metaphorical Justification is the true Scripture-notion of the Justification of a Sinner Justification indeed in its full extent and latitude signifies the acceptation of our Persons and the restoring us to a state of Grace and Favour with God which is somewhat more than bare Remission but the first Act of Justification on Gods part and that which draws all the rest after it is the Pardon of our Sins this is a Sinners Righteousness wherewith he must appear before God This is the Commission which Christ gave to his Disciples To preach Remission of Sins in his Name this is the great Priviledge of the Gospel that now by Christ all that believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses Act. xiii 39. That is that now Christ hath made a tonement and expiation for those sins for which the Law of Moses did appoint no Sacrifice Where to be justified signifies to be delivered from the guilt and condemnation of Sin that is to be pardoned But not to heap up many Testimonies I shall principally insist on the Fourth Chapter to the Romans as being the proper Seat of this Controversie There St. Paul enquires by what means our Father Abraham was justified before God And in answer to it he tells us that Abraham was not justified by Works but by Faith Where by Works the Apostle does not mean only the Works of the Mosaical Law an External and Ceremonial Righteousness for he proceeds to that in the tenth verse but he seems principally to intend a perfect and unsinning Righteousness Let us then examine what the Apostle means by Justification by Faith what this Righteousness of Faith is as it is opposed to a Righteousness of Works and there are four expressions whereby this Righteousness is described which signifie one and the same thing That it is an imputed Righteousness vers 3 6. that it is a Righteousness without Works that it is a Justification of the ungodly vers 5. that it consists in the Pardon of Sin vers 7 8. I shall begin with the last because this is Mr. Ferguson's grand Charge against me That I place Iustification in the forgiveness of Sin but so does our Apostle and alledges the Authority of the Prophet David for it Even as David also deseribeth the blessedness of that man unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without Works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin vers 6 7 8. This is the Justification of Faith in opposition to Justification by Works that those who heartily believe in God as Abraham did though they have been formerly guilty of many sins and are still subject to many infirmities and defects yet God for Christs sake will forgive their past sins and their present imperfections and will reward them above the Deserts and Merits of their Works A Righteousness of Works consists in Innocency and Perfection but a Righteousness of Faith in Sincerity and Pardon Upon this account it is called an imputed Righteousness Faith was accounted and reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness and blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth Righteousness Which signifies that this is matter of Grace not of Debt for to him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of Grace but of Debt When a man is justified by Works he is absolved because he is innocent and rewarded because he hath merited a Reward which is the Justification for which Mr. Ferguson pleads in a direct opposition to St. Paul but Justification by Faith requires the favour and acceptance of God because though it includes an honest and sincere mind and a readiness to do our best to please God yet it is consistent with a great many infirmities and miscarriages and defects which cannot pass the trial of strict Justice and this is imputed Righteousness when God accepts of that for our Righteousness and Justification which in a strict sense is not Righteousness Whatever is imputed to us for Righteousness must be good but imperfect If it be not good it is no part of Righteousness and therefore cannot be imputed instead of the whole and if it be perfect there is no need of this gracious acceptation it is then a strict and proper not an imputed Righteousness Upon the same account it is called a Righteousness without Works vers 6. Which must not be understood in such a loose sense as if God would justifie a man who does nothing which is good as if he would account that man righteous who does no Righteousness which is expresly contrary to the Doctrine of St. Iohn 1 Epist. iii. 7. But the meaning is either that God sometimes accepts of great and generous Acts of Faith instead of Works when there is no occasion or opportunity of Action which was the case of Abraham when he believed in hope against hope that he should have a Son in his old Age to which the Apostle principally refers in the 5th verse when he tells us That to him that worketh not but believeth his Faith is counted for Righteousness Or
Faith and Manners The Authority of Testimony is proper only to those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles for it may reasonably be presumed that those Persons who convers'd with the Apostles themselves or convers'd with those who convers'd with the Apostles who understood the Phrase and Dialect of that Age and those particular Controversies and Disputes which were then on foot may be able to give us a better account of the traditionary sense of Scripture and of the practice of the Apostles than those who lived in after-Ages and upon this account the Writings of those who lived in the first Centuries have always had a just Esteem and Authority in the Christian Church but still the more Ancient they are the greater is their Authority and the farther they are removed from the Fountain of Tradition so their Authority lessens The Authority of Discipline and Order is that Authority which every particular Church has over her own Members or which the Universal Church represented in General Councils has over particular Churches For while we live in Communion with any Church we oblige our selves to submit to its Government and at least so far to receive those Doctrines which she owns as not to disturb Publick Peace and Order by our Private Disputes But in all other cases he has the greatest Authority who has the best Reason and it is a childish thing to urge the bare Authority of any Man or Church when it hath neither Scripture nor Reason to support it So that I do not urge the consent of these Reformed Churches upon account of any inherent Authority but to make it appear how vainly Mr. Ferguson brags when he charges me with opposing the received Doctrines of Protestant Churches For indeed those Doctrines which I oppose are meer Novelties and were never publickly owned by any Reformed Church and never had any greater Authority than what an Assembly of Divines and an Ordinance of Parliament could give them He who understands what notion the first Reformers had of justifying Faith that it is fiducia misericordia propter Christum a firm and stedfast belief and hope that they should find mercy with God for Christs sake can never imagine that they once dreamt of such an Imputation of Christs Righteousness to them as should make them stand in no need of Mercy or of such a Iustification as is the Off-spring of Iustice and imports one transacting with us in a Iuridical way without the infringement of Law or Equity in opposition to Pardon and Remission which is the result of Mercy and the act of one exercising favour which is Mr. Ferguson's Account of it in his own words But thirdly As this Notion of Imputation has no Foundation in Scripture as I abundantly proved in my former Discourse of which our Author takes no notice and it was very wisely done of him for I am sure he cannot answer it so it overthrows the principal Doctrines of the Gospel and contradicts its main design I shall briefly name some few First Justification by a perfect Righteousness is inconsistent with pardon and forgiveness Mr. Ferguson acknowledges That to justifie and to pardon are wholly distinct in their Natures and Ideas and always separated in the cases of such as are arraigned at humane Tribunals and that thus it is in the actings of God too Now I wonder he did not consider that by the same reason the same subject is not capable of both He who is universally justified in our Authors notion that is who is acquitted and absolved in a Juridical way i. e. as perfectly innocent and righteous needs no pardon nor is he capable of it because he has no sins to be pardon'd and he who is pardon'd cannot be justified in this sense because Pardon supposes him a Sinner and Justification supposes him innocent which hath some little appearance of a Contradiction So that the Gospel-way of Justification which is by Pardon and Forgiveness is quite discarded and we are justified by a legal Righteousness or by the Works of the Law that is by a perfect and unsinning Obedience though the Apostle tells us That by the Works of the Law no flesh shall be justified for though this perfect Righteousness whereby we are justified be not our own but the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us yet it is the Works of the Law still which is an express Contradiction to the Apostles Doctrine And I wonder what our Author thinks of all those Promises of Pardon which are contained in the Gospel and which are the greatest support and comfort of Sinners when it is impossible to find any place for them in his New-Gospel Secondly This notion of Justification overthrows the Necessity and Merit of Christs Death and Sacrifice the vertue of a Sacrifice consists in the expiation and forgiveness of sin but now if Justification excludes Pardon there is no need of a Sacrifice if nothing will satisfie the demands of the Law but a perfect and unsinning Obedience then there can be no Sacrifice for sin or at best it is to no purpose for it cannot satisfie the Law and therefore not expiate our sin and if Christ have satisfied the Law by his perfect Obedience there is no reason why he should suffer the penalty for no Law can oblige us both to obey it perfectly and to endure the Penalties for the breach of it though we do perfectly obey it So that if Christ died for our sins and if remission of sins must be preached in his name then we are not perfectly righteous by the imputation of his Righteousness but must obtain the pardon of our sins through Faith in his Blood Thirdly This notion of Justification destroys the Grace and Mercy of God in the Justification of a Sinner This Mr. Ferguson expresly owns That Pardon indeed if there could be any such thing is the result of Mercy but Iustification is the Off-spring of Iustice and imports Gods transacting with us in a Iuridical way without the infringement of Law or Equity And I know not any assertion which more expresly destroys the Grace of the Gospel Whereas St. Paul attributes our Justification as well as Pardon to the Grace of God We are justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Iesus Nor will it relieve him to say that our Justification is an Act of Grace because though we are justified in a proper Law-notion by a perfect Righteousness yet this Righteousness is not inherent but imputed which is an act of Grace for besides that this implies a contradiction to be justified in a proper Law-sense by an imputed that is an improper Righteousness and that God proceeds in a Iuridical way without the infringement of Law and yet admits of such a Righteousness as not the Law but only Grace can accept I say besides this we may for the very same Reason say that Pardon is an act of Justice because it is purchas'd by the Death of Christ.
justified in time as soon as they are capable of it that is as soon they are in being In his Book of Communion p. 204. he has ten Propositions much to the same purpose He there tells us That Christ in his undertaking of the work of our Redemption with God was constituted and considered as a common publick person in the stead of them for whose reconciliation to God he suffered And that being thus a common Person upon his undertaking as to merit and efficacy and upon his actual performance as to solemn declaration this is what Dr. Crisp calls Gods laying iniquity upon Christ by way of Obligation and by way of Execution was as such as a common person acquitted absolved justified and freed from all and every thing that on the behalf of the Elect as due to them was charged upon him or could so be So that he was from all Eternity upon his undertaking and in time upon his actual performance as a common Person that is in the name and as representing the persons of the Elect acquitted absolved and justified and therefore as it follows Christ received the general acquittance for them all and they are all acquitted in the Covenant of the Mediator whence they are said to be crucified with him to die with him to rise with him to sit with him in heavenly places namely in the Covenant of the Mediator This is what Dr. Crisp calls a secret application of Gods laying iniquity upon Christ to particular persons which is done before they know it and the only difference between him and Dr. Owen is that Dr. Owen will not allow this to be a discharge of the Elect in their own persons but only in the Person of the Mediator and Dr. Crisp thinks it more proper to say that this is a personal discharge of them since it is done in their names and persons but it is no great matter who speaks most properly when the thing is the same In another Discourse of the Death of Christ in answer to Mr. Baxter's Objections against his Treatise of Redemption p. 72. he asserts that the Elect have an actual right to all that was purchased by Christ's Death before believing and that is equivalent to their having a right from Eternity or from the first moment of their being And he offers it as his one opinion Whether absolution from the guilt of sin and obligation unto death though not as terminated in the conscience that is though it be not known to the Person which is Dr. Crisp's secret application for complete Iustification do not precede our actual believing and expounds the Justification of the ungodly Rom. 4. to this sense as Dr. Crisp expresly does And though he dare not assert complete Iustification to be before believing yet he affirms that absolution is as it is considered as the act of the Will of God that is secret and known only to God for a discharge from the effects of anger naturally precedes all collation of any fruits of love such as faith is And the difference between this absolution and complete Justification is no more but this That absolution wants that act of pardoning mercy which is to be terminated and completed in the conscience of a sinner That is though such a man be pardoned before believing yet he can have no sense of his Pardon before believing which is exactly Dr. Crisp's notion And absolution wants the hearts perswasion of the truth and goodness of the Promise and the mercy held out in the Promise And it wants the Souls rolling it self on Christ and receiving Christ as the Author and Finisher of that mercy an All-sufficient Saviour to them that believe All which signifies no more than that Absolution is before and without Faith for this apprehending the truth and goodness of the Promise and rolling it self on Christ according to the Doctors notion constitute the justifying Act of Faith And therefore when the Doctor elsewhere tells us that the Elect till the full time of their actual deliverance determined and appointed to them in their several Generations be accomplished are personally under the Curse of the Law and on that account are legally obnoxious to the wrath of God He only chuses to contradict himself to avoid the imputation of Antinomianism For by their actual deliverance I presume he must understand the time of their actual believing and if they are absolved before they actually believe how can they be under the Law or legally obnoxious to the wrath of God And therefore he immediately qualifies this that though they are obnoxious to the Law and the Curse thereof yet not at all with its primitive intention of execution upon them which is as much as to say that they are obnoxious to the Curse of the Law but not obnoxious to the execution of that Curse which I take to be non-sense How then are they obnoxious to the Curse of the Law Why as it is a means appointed to help forward their acquaintance with Christ and acceptance with God on his account By which I suppose he means that their Absolution being at present secret and not terminated and completed in the Conscience they are terrified and scared with the threatnings of the Law as fancying themselves to be under it when they are not and this makes them fly to Christ for refuge and sanctuary And though Dr. Crisp indeed do not like this way of affrighting men to Christ by the Law yet the difference is not great and makes no material alteration in the Scheme of their Religion And therefore when Dr. Owen adds That it was determined by Father Son and Holy Ghost that the way of the actual personal deliverance of the Elect from the Sentence and Curse of the Law should be in and by such a way and dispensation as might lead to the praise of the glorious grace of God and to glorifie the whole Trinity by ascending to the Fathers love through the works of the Spirit and Bloud of the Son All that he means by it is this that we shall have no sense of our Absolution by the Bloud of Christ till we actually believe nor be actually possessed of Eternal Life till we be renewed and sanctified all which Dr. Crisp will own and is consistent enough with our Justification or Absolution from Eternity since Faith and all other blessings are the effect of our antecedent Absolution in Christ as the Doctor confesses And this is all Mr. Ferguson means when he tells us That Christ's own discharge was an immediate consequent of his sufferings and they for whom he suffered had also immediately a fundamental right of being acquitted but their actual deliverance was to be in the way and order that he who had substituted himself in our room and he who had both admitted and been the Author of the substitution thought fit to appoint This is the necessary consequence of this Doctrine that if Christ acted as a Surety in the name
Saviour with the necessity of obeying his Laws and being conformed to his Example that esteem and reverence we owe to the Person of Christ with a reverence for his Laws that no man might expect to be saved by Christ though he be infinitely gracious and compassionate and inherit all the boundless Perfections of the Deity without the practice of an universal Righteousness And therefore I showed that all those Considerations which did naturally result from the contemplation of the Person of Christ as he is the Eternal Son of God who was made Man and sent into the World to accomplish the work of our Redemption did necessarily engage us to obey his Laws but gave us no encouragement to expect any thing more from him upon his Personal account than what he hath promised in his Gospel This I observed was a plain demonstration of Gods love to Mankind that he sent so great and so dear a Person as his only begotten Son to save Sinners No man can doubt of Gods good will to Sinners who sees the Son of God cloathed with our flesh and dying as a Sacrifice for our sins and this gives relief to our guilty fears and encourages us to retrieve our past follies by new Obedience No man will return to his Duty without some hope of Pardon and Forgiveness for his past sins and the proper use of Gods love in sending Christ into the World is to conquer our Obstinacy and to encourage our Hopes Thus the greatness of Christs Person gives great Reverence and Authority to his Gospel and an inviolable Sanction to his Laws as the Apostle argues If the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of Reward how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation which at first began to be spoken by the Lord Heb. 1. 2 3. And this gives great Authority to his Example and lays forcible obligations on us to imitate him who was not only our Saviour but God incarnate And this assures us of the infinite value of his Sacrifice and of the power of his Intercession God cannot but be pleased when his own Son undertakes to be a Ransom and to make Atonement for sinners which is so great a vindication of Gods Dominion and Soveraignty of the authority of his Laws and the wisdom and justice of his Providence that he may securely pardon humble and penitent sinners without reproaching any of his Attributes and we can desire no greater security for the performance of this Gospel-Covenant than that it was sealed with the blood of the Son of God And this is a great encouragement to return to God when we have such a powerful Advocate and Mediator to intercede for us But then we must expect no more from Christ upon account of his personal Excellencies and Perfections than what he hath promised in his Gospel Christ is the object of our Faith and Hope only as he is our Saviour and he is our Saviour in no other sense than as he is our Mediator and he mediates for us as our Priest that is in vertue of that Covenant which he hath sealed with his blood and therefore we have no reason to expect any thing from the Person of Christ which is not contained in his Covenant much less which contradicts it for that would be in effect to renounce his Mediation and to trust to the goodness of his Nature Christ will in his own Person accomplish all those Promises he hath made whether they concern the present assistances of his Grace or his Providence and Protection in this world or the future rewards of the next but we must learn what Christ will do for us and upon what terms not from the boundless Perfections and Excellencies of his Person but from the Declarations of the Gospel though the consideration of his Person who he is and how he lived and what he taught may convince any man that he will be a Saviour to none but those who live in the practise of that Righteousness of which he was a Preacher and Example Now to silence the clamors of some men who upbraided those Preachers who spent their greatest zeal in expounding the Laws of Christ and in pressing men by all the Motives and Arguments of the Gospel the Sacrifice and Mediation of Christ the necessity of a good Life to make men happy hereafter and the many great advantages of Holiness here c. to the practise of an universal Righteousness I say to silence the clamors of those who upbraided such Preachers with not preaching Christ I considered in the next place what it is to know Christ and so consequently what it is to preach Him and the sum of it was this That to know Christ is to be acquainted with that Revelation which Christ hath made of Gods will to the world For as in former ages God made himself known by the light of Nature and the works of Creation and Providence and those partial and occasional Revelations of his Will which he made to good men now in these last days he hath sent his Son into the world to declare his Will to us And therefore the only useful knowledge is to understand those Revelations which Christ hath made of Gods Will the necessary consequence of which is that he who expounds the Laws and Doctrine of the Gospel does in the most proper sense preach Christ as Philip is said to preach Christ to the Samaritans Act. 8. 5. which in ver 12. is called Preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God and the Name of Iesus Christ that is the whole Doctrine of the Gospel The whole Christian Religion is the Knowledge of Christ and the Laws of Righteousness and the Motives to Obedience as principal a part as any because this was the ultimate design of Christs coming into the world to reform mens lives and to prepare them for the happiness of the next world by transforming them into a Divine Nature All that Christ did and suffered was only in order to this end and then we understand all those mysteries of the Incarnation and Death and Intercession of Christ as much as is necessary to the purposes of Religion when we understand what obligations they lay on us to a holy Life and feel their power and vertue in renewing and sanctifying our minds In the next place I observed that the foundation of the greatest and most dangerous mistakes was laid in a wrong notion of our Union to Christ of which some men discourse in such uncouth and Cabbalistical terms as no Body can understand and therefore I endeavoured to state the true notion of our Union to Christ and Communion with him And the sum of it is this that those Metaphors which describe our union to Christ do primarily refer to the Christian Church not to every individual Christian as Christ is the Head and the Church or whole Society of Christians his Body a Husband and
Allegories and very gravely states the difference between a Metaphor and Allegory and Parable c. as if he were reading a Rhetorick Lecture to his School-boys and very strongly proves that it is lawful to use Metaphors and that the Spirit of God in Scripture does so it being his peculiar Talent to prove that which no body denies at length he comes to the business to show that some of the expressions reflected on in the Writings of the Nonconformists are such as the Holy Ghost himself hath preceded them in the use of and that to the very same ends and purposes for which they produce them And that he may not be thought to design the disparagement of any party of men by quoting Testimonies from divers of their Authors who rather than not strain up the dregs of their choler against the Fanaticks for their Phraseologies have even written in derogation of Scripture-phrases and made the Spirit of God the subject of their derision as well as the Nonconformists to avoid this he confines himself to me alone This is true Fanatick Charity He will by no means good man disparage any party of men only he informs his Readers that there are a sort of men who write against the Fanaticks and it is pretty well known who they are that make the Spirit of God the subject of their derision And why so I pray because they laugh at the Fanaticks for their ridiculous abuse of Scripture-Phrases and Metaphors Though they prate Nonsense in Scripture-phrase yet because it is the phrase of Scripture which they thus abuse every one who laughs at them for it if we will believe Mr. Ferguson makes the Spirit of God the subject of his derision And yet our Author when he is in a better mood tells us But let them and all such Persons of what communion and perswasion soever they are who turn the Gospel thus into a Romance and subvert the Mysteries of Faith by transforming them into Phantastick Allegories be treated with the derision and contempt of all who pretend to Wisdom and Modesty So that it seems some men may turn the very Gospel it self into a Romance and abuse the Phrases and Expressions of Scripture to very evil purposes and then it is not a deriding the Spirit of God but that which is consistent with Wisdom and Modesty to expose them to derision and contempt Thus contrary is our Author to himself when he opposes the Quakers and vindicates his own dear Brethren who have abused Scripture-expressions as grosly though in many cases with less wit and to worse purposes than the Quakers themselves as he is forc'd to acknowledge of T. W. that maybe in some things he hath prevaricated which is in plain English to say that it may be he hath either play'd the Fool or the Knave for which character T. W. is very much beholden to Mr. Ferguson But he hath taken care that no other Person shall be able to answer this Charge for though he very charitably accuses all men who write against the Fanaticks yet he names no man nor gives any particular instances of this prophane derision of the Holy Spirit only I am singled out to bear the fury of his assault and I am very well contented with it provided that if I acquit my self his bare Testimony may not be taken against any man till the Cause be first heard and tried The plain state of the Controversie is this I charge them with drawing a New Scheme of Religion such as is no where to be found in express terms in Scripture from a pretended Acquaintance with Christs Person I foresaw an easie and obvious objection against this that there are no men who stuff their Books and Discourses with more frequent quotations of Scripture than they do right or wrong they have a Scripture proof for every thing they say and does it not look like a calumny then to charge them with fetching their Religion from any other Fountain than the holy Scriptures In answer to this I made it appear that they expound Scriptures according to their own fancies and in compliance with their pre-conceived opinions that they do not fetch their notions from the Scriptures but wrest the Scriptures from their proper and genuine sense to make them countenance their own fancies Now because I produce those Scripture expressions which these men pervert and burlesque to use his own word by their wild and fanciful applications Mr. Ferguson had no way to be even with me but to charge me with burlesquing the Scripture it self As for instance They tell us That all we have to do in order to our salvation is to get into Christ and to be united to him for then his Fulness and Beauty and Riches and Righteousness and Merits and All is ours and in order to this Union which what it is they could never yet explain we must first come to Christ and then receive him and apply his Merits and Righteousness to our selves and then lean and rest and roll our Souls upon him and trust to be saved wholly by his Merits without any Righteousness of our own and all this they learnedly prove from those Scripture-expressions of coming to Christ and receiving him c. which signifie no more than believing in Christ or undertaking the publick Profession of Christianity but because I show how far these Scripture-phrases are from countenancing their Gibberish Mr. Ferguson challenges me with burlesquing the Scripture Coming to Christ signifies according to the Eastern Dialect to believe in Christ or to become his Disciple but because it is called coming hence these men of fancy dream of I know not what spiritual progress of the Soul to Christ and explain believing by coming to Christ which in their Divinity is one of the first Acts of Faith Now because I say That it falls out luckily that Faith is called coming I am charged with deriding the Scripture whereas it is plain that if I deride any thing it is only their foolish Explications of Scripture-phrases for all their Mystical Divinity had been spoiled and they must have been forc'd to have spoke plain sense like other men or to have spoke Nonsense without the least pretence of the authority of Scripture had it not been for such Eastern Phrases which were intended by the Holy Ghost to another purpose but are capable of being perverted by such English Divines to the countenancing of a New-fashion'd English Divinity and I think still that this fell out very luckily for them Thus with an equal skill and ingenuity he accounts it deriding the Scripture to say That coming and going are very intelligible explications of believing whereas coming must be explained by believing not believing by coming unless we will in a proper sense burlesque the Scripture Thus because I reject their fanciful and presumptuous trust and confidence in Christ viz. to be saved by him for no other reason but because they trust to be saved
by him I am charged with deriding all trust and dependence on Christ for the performance of his Promises or the influences of his Grace and because I reject their proof of this from St. Paul's trusting in God in the faithful discharge of his Apostolical Office notwithstanding all the Persecutions he suffered from Jews and Heathens 2 Tim. 1. 12. I am accused of involving the Scripture in the same condemnation and bringing St. Paul himself under the same imputation Certainly these men think themselves all Apostles and that they expound the Scriptures with as infallible a Spirit as first indited them for otherwise they would not be so impudent as to charge every man who laughs at their ridiculous applications of Scripture-phrases with deriding the Scriptures and the holy Spirit And yet this is the true Reason of all this noise and out-cry about burlesquing the Scripture for he directs his Readers to page 62 63 c. of my Book for an example of my sacrilegious abuse of the words of Scripture to make my Readers sport and to render my Adversaries ridiculous and whoever consults the place will only find a Scheme of their Divinity expressed in their own canting phrases without any Art to make it look ridiculously but only a true and naked representation of it and though I cannot deny that it is a famous Example of burlesquing the Scripture yet Mr. Ferguson ought to have laid the Saddle upon the right Horses back and then I doubt his own dear Friends must suffer under this Imputation There is nothing I more heartily designed than to rescue the Scripture from such Abuses as appears from what I immediately added That the whole Mystery of this and a great deal more stuff of this nature not of Fanaticism as he cites my words purposely to create the greater odium which is very familiar with him and agreeable enough to the purity of his Christian Morals consists in wresting metaphorical and allusive expressions to a proper sense When the Scripture describes the Profession of Christianity a sincere Belief and Obedience to the Gospel by having Christ and being in Christ and coming to him and receiving him these men expound these phrases to a proper and natural sense to signifie I know not what unintelligible Union and spiritual Progress and Closure of the Soul with him an Union of Persons instead of an Agreement in Faith and Manners If this be to burlesque Scripture to deliver it from the Freaks of an Enthusiastick Fancy and to expound it to a plain and easie sense such as is agreeable to the Understandings of men and worthy of the Spirit of God I acknowledge the Charge and am afraid my Adversaries will never be guilty of that Crime Thus when I shew how convincingly these men prove their darling Opinions from a fanciful Exposition of Scripture-Metaphors and Types and Figures and among the rest observe how many pretty Resemblances of Christ Mr. Watson has discover'd in the brazen Serpent wherein Mr. Ferguson himself acknowledges he has prevaricated I am charged with deriding the Type it self and making scornful Reflections upon the main scope and design of the comparison T. W. among other things tells us that as the Serpent was lifted up to be look'd upon by the stung Israelites which looking implied a secret hope they had of cure so if we do but look on Christ fiducially we shall be cured of our sins by which comparison he would prove that because the Israelites were miraculously cured only by looking upon the brazen Serpent that therefore there is nothing more required of us to be cured of our Sins but only looking fiducially on Christ that is confidently hoping to be saved by him this Mr. Ferguson says is parallel to the words of our Saviour and the true intendment and meaning of them Iohn iii. 15 16. And as Moses lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderness even so must the Son of man be lifted up that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And now I will acknowledge that I have done very ill in ranking this comparison of T. W's among the rest of his Prevarications if Mr. Ferguson can prove that this believing signifies no more than this fiducial looking on Christ which I am sure he can never prove except it be in Mr. Watson's way What he adds about Mr. Tho. Vincent is sufficiently answered already and shall be considered in another place This is the sum of his Charge against me for burlesquing Scripture in which I cannot think he was serious but only said this because he must say something and had nothing wiser to say Or as it is with some scolding people who wanting wit to make proper and sudden Repartees chuse rather than to say nothing to say the same things which were said to them though the impropriety of the application and the dullness of it serve only to make mirth for the by-standers This I perceive is Mr. Ferguson's peculiar Talent and to give him his due he is very dexterous at it as will appear in two or three instances more of a like narure I charge some of the Nonconformists for I never thought them all guilty of it with perverting the Scripture by expounding allusive and metaphorical expressions to a proper sense Mr. Ferguson dares not deny this Charge for the matter of fact is too evident but he shews great Skill in retorting it and gives several instances how I pervert Scripture in the same manner Thus he tells his Readers That whereas other Expositors of Scripture have expounded Christs being called The Brightness of his Fathers Glory and the express Image of his Person Heb. i. 3. in a plain and proper sense and have accordingly argued from it for the Deity of Christ against the Socinians Mr. Sherlock by Christs being stiled the Brightness of his Fathers Glory c. understands no more but those Discoveries which Christ hath made of God being as true a Representation of the Divine Nature and Will as any Picture is of the Person it represents When he says I understand no more by it he expresly contradicts my own words which are these Upon which account too as well as with respect to his Divine Nature he is called the brightness of his Fathers glory c. So that I acknowledge that Christ is called the brightness of his Fathers glory as well with respect to his Divine Nature as to the glorious Revelations of his Will and for Mr. Ferguson to say I do not and upon that account to insinuate so foul a Charge as Socinianism others would have called a wilful and malicious lye But suppose the worst that I had expounded Christs being called the brightness of his Fathers Glory c. only with respect to those glorious Discoveries he hath made of God he might have said it had been a false and dangerous and Socinian Exposition or what he pleased but it is a very unhappy
most precious Iewels of Christs Body and Blood whereby our Ransome might be fully paid the Law fulfilled and his Iustice satisfied There is no Controversie between us about this matter that it was an expression of the undeserved Goodness of God to send Christ into the World to save Sinners And secondly The Mercy of God is seen in the very Act of Justifying us in accepting this Atonement and in forgiving our sins Thus we are informed in the second part of that Sermon of Salvation Justification is not the Office of Man but of God for Man cannot make himself righteous by his own Works neither in part nor in the whole for that were the greatest arrogancy and presumption of Man that Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his own Works take away and purge his own Sins and so Justifie himself But Justification is the Office of God only and is not a thing which we render to him but which we receive of him not which we give to him but which we take of him by his free Mercy and by the only Merits of his most dearly beloved Son our only Redeemer Saviour and Justifier Jesus Christ. Bywhich words it is very plain what is understood by Justification being Gods Act and not Mans that is that it is an Act of Favour and Grace not of Merit and Desert Though God may be said to Justifie an Innocent Man when he pronounces him Just and Righteous according to Law which is the proper office of a Judge i. e. to acquit an Innocent Man when he is arraigned yet in this case an Innocent Man may be said to Justifie himself because he is Justified by his own Actions and God only like a Just and Righteous Judge pronounces the Sentence of Justification that is acquits and absolves him as his actions deserve which strict Justice requires But in the Justification of a Sinner who dares not stand the trial of strict Justice but appeals to the Grace and Mercy of God Justification is properly Gods Act and not Mans is owing to the Divine Grace and Mercy not to Mans Merit and Desert Upon the same account we are told in the same place that not our own Act to believe in Christ or that this our Faith in Christ which is within us doth not justifie us for that were to count our selves to be justified by some Act or Vertue that is within our selves Which I confess sounds very like what some men say That Faith doth not justifie us as our own Act but as it apprehends the Righteousness of Christ and applies it to us by which Righteousness thus apprehended by Faith we are justified but there is nothing less meant in this place as will appear from considering the whole Sentence which is this So that the true understanding of this Doctrine We be justified freely by Faith without Works or that we be justified by Faith in Christ only is not that this our own Act to believe in Christ or this our Faith in Christ which is within us doth justifie us and deserve our Justification unto us for that were to count our selves to be justified by some Act or Vertue that is within our selves but the true understanding and meaning thereof is that although we hear Gods Word and believe it and do never so many Works thereunto yet we must renounce the Merit of all our said Vertues of Faith Hope Charity and all other Vertues and good Deeds which we have done shall do or can do as things that be far too weak and insufficient and imperfect to deserve Remission of our Sins and our Justification and therefore we must trust only in Gods Mercy and that Sacrifice which our High Priest and Saviour Christ Jesus the Son of God once offered for us upon the Cross to obtain thereby Gods Grace and Remission as well of Original Sin in Baptism as of all Actual Sin committed by us after Baptism if we truly repent and turn unfeignedly to him again The meaning of which is plain that we are not justified by Faith as our own act as we are not justified by Hope and Charity as our own acts that is that they cannot merit our Justification or the Forgiveness of our sins When we have done the best we can we must still fly to the Mercy of God through the Merits of our Lord Jesus Christ that distinction of Faiths justifying not as our own Act but as it apprehends the Righteousness of Christ and cloaths us with the perfect Robes of his Righteousness for which God accounts us perfectly Righteous is of a later date than these Homilies and very inconsistent with the Doctrine contained in them Thus you see what Gods part is in the Justification of a Sinner viz. To provide a Ransom and to forgive sins in vertue of that Ransom that is to justifie those who according to the strictness and rigor of the Law are not Just and Righteous Persons Thus to conclude this in the words of the Homily You have heard the Office of God in our Iustification and how we receive it of him freely by his Mercy without our Deserts Let us now consider what is Christs part in our Justification and that is expressed by Iustice that is the satisfaction of Iustice or the Price of our Redemption by the offering of his Body and shedding of his Blood with fulfilling of the Law perfectly and throughly The plain meaning of which is that we are justified for the sake of Christs Merits that his Obedience in doing and suffering the Will of God in dying for our sins and in fulfilling the Law is the meritorious cause of our Justification that is did deserve at Gods hands that for Christs sake he should pardon all humble penitent and believing Sinners This is all the Imputation of Christs Righteousness which our Church acknowledges that the Righteousness of Christ is the meritorious Cause of our Justification Thus we are told That Infants being baptized and dying in their Infancy are by this Sacrifice washed from their sins brought to Gods favour and made his Children and Inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven And they which in act or deed do sin after their Baptism when they turn again to God unfeignedly they are likewise washed by this Sacrifice from their sins in such sort that there remaineth not any spot of sin that shall be imputed to their damnation Which is to the same sense with that of St. Iohn that if we walk in the light as he is in the light if we are holy as God is we have fellowship one with another and the Blood of Iesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin 1 Iohn i. 7. And to this sense our Church expounds those Texts Rom. iii. All have offended and have need of the Glory of God but are justified freely by his Grace by Redemption which is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set forth to us for a Reconciler and Peace-maker through
faith in his Blood to shew his Righteousness And in the Tenth Chapter Christ is the end of the Law unto Righteousness to every man that believeth And in the Eighth Chapter That which was impossible by the Law in as much as it was weak by the flesh God sending his own Son in the similitude of sinful flesh by sin damned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us which walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit Which Texts are alledged by our Modern Divines to prove the Imputation of Christs Righteousness to us as the formal cause of our Justification but our Church expresly tells us that she understands these Texts to signifie no more on Christs part but Iustice or the Satisfaction of Gods Iustice. And whereas these new Divines make such a difference between the Active and Passive Righteousness of Christ that by his Death and Sufferings he expiated our Sins and by his Active Obedience makes us righteous Our Church knows no difference in this matter but assures us that they both concur to the same effect to make satisfaction for our sins He made satisfaction to Gods Iustice by the offering of his Body and shedding his Blood with fulfilling the Law perfectly and throughly Which account I expresly gave of it in my former Discourse p. 330. Edit 2. p. 231. In this sense we are taught that Christ is now the Righteousness of all them that truly believe in him he for them paid their Ransom by his Death he for them fulfilled the Law in his Life So that now in him and by him every true Christian Man may be called a fulfiller of the Law for asmuch as that which their infirmity lacked Christs Iustice hath supplied Which last clause the Looking-Glass-Maker thought fit to leave out for he had so much wit in his anger as to see that it did not make to his purpose for the meaning of it is this that Christs active and passive Righteousness is imputed to us to procure the pardon of our sins thereby to supply the defects of our Righteousness not to make us formally righteous though our Righteousness be imperfect and defective yet Christ by his Righteousness having obtained the pardon of our sins we may be said in him to fulfil the Law in as much as that which our Infirmity lacked Christs Iustice his Merit and Satisfaction as it is before explained hath supplied And once for all our Church tells us what she means by being justified by Christ only We put our Faith in Christ that we be justified by him only that we be justified by Gods Mercy and the Merits of our Saviour Christ only and by no vertue and good works of our own that is in us or that we can be able to have or to do to deserve the same Christ himself being the only cause meritorious thereof So that the plain sense of our Church is that Christs part in our Justification is only to be the meritorious cause of it to merit Pardon and Justification for all those who heartily believe in him And who-ever of our Communion have affirmed any more they have in so doing plainly deserted the Doctrine of our Church And therefore Doctor Prideaux himself does expresly disown the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ in any other sense than that of Merit Iustificamur per justitiam Christi non personae quâ ipse vestitus est sed meriti quâ suos vestit nobis imputatam that is We are justified by the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us not by his Personal Righteousness as Dr. Owen affirms with which he is cloathed himself but with the Righteousness of Merit with which he cloaths those who belong to him And in answer to a passage out of Bellarmine he adds Quis unquam è nostris nos per justitiam Christi imputatam formaliter justificari asseruit that is Who among us ever affirmed that we were formally justified by the imputed Righteousness of Christ. And as the learned Forbs observes it sounds very like a contradiction to assert that the Righteousness of Christ is both the meritorious and the formal cause of our Justification Nequit enim fieri ut eadem res simul fit causa efficiens ad quam meritum reducitur formalis ejusdem effecti quia sic simul de essentia effecti foret non foret cùm causa formalis interna sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 efficiens autem externa tantum ut constat that is It cannot be that the same thing should be both the efficient as Merit is and the formal cause of the same effect for so it must both be of the essence and not of the essence of the effect for a formal cause is internal and belongs to the nature and essence of the thing but an efficient is an external cause as every one knows And therefore when the Learned Bishop Davenant asserts the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us to be the formal cause of our Justification and explains it by our being justified ex intuitu meritorum Christi propter Christum with respect to the Merits of Christ and for Christs sake though he uses a different phrase which too many since have abused to bad purposes yet he seems to mean no more by it than we do who say that the Righteousness of Christ is the meritorious cause of our Justification for that must be explained by the same phrases of being justified for Christs sake and with respect to the Merits of Christ and indeed the only difference the Bishop makes between the Righteousness of Christ being the meritorious and the formal cause of our Justification is no more but this that in the first case he considers the Merits of Christ absolutely as the price of our Redemption in the second he considers those same Merits of Christ applied to particular persons for the pardon of their particular sins which still makes it no more than a meritorious cause His words are these Eadem unica justitia Christi in se suo valore considerata est meritoria causa humanae justificationis considerata autem quatenus imputatur donatur applicatur tanquam sua singulis credentibus in Christum insitis subit vicem causae formalis And that he intends no more by a formal cause than what others express by a meritorious cause is plain in this that he acknowledges the imputation even of Christs active Righteousness only in the sense of Merit He expresses his agreement with Vasques in this matter who acknowledges the imputation of the Merit of Christs active Obedience Cùm dicimus Merita Christi nobis imputari idem de justitia sanctitate illius existimamus nam cùm Merita Christi ex sanctitate ejus dignitatem accipiant eodem sensu quo Merita nobis dicuntur imputari ipsa etiam Iustitia Christi imputari dicitur that is When we say that
the Merits of Christ are imputed to us we understand the same thing of his Holiness and active Righteousness for since his Purity and Holiness gave worth and dignity to his Merits in the same sense wherein his Merits are said to be imputed to us his active Righteousness and Obedience is imputed also So that the Bishop never thought that the Obedience and Righteousness of Christ is so made ours that we are accounted by God to have done the same things to have performed all that Righteousness which Christ performed which is the modern notion of Imputation but it is so imputed to us that upon account of the Merits of Christs Life and Death God forgives the Sins and accepts the Persons of those who heartily believe in him as the same Learned and Reverend Person excellently explains it soon after Where he tells us that we are delivered from the Law by Faith in Christ Whosoever believes in him shall not perish and shall not come into condemnation or into Iudgment as he reads it Iohn v. 24. and adds What Iudgment is this from which Believers are delivered by Christ Proculdubio strictum illud ubi juxta normam legis aliquis examinatur prout deprehenditur huic norme respondere justus aut injustus pronunciatur c. No doubt that strict Judgment where men are examined according to the Rule of the Law and are pronounced just or unjust as they are found to agree with that Rule Iustificatio igitur salus credentium non ex eo dependet quod habent in se qualitatem nova justitiae quam audent legali examini stricto Dei judicio subjicere sed quod per propter Merita Redemptoris non subituri sunt tale judicium sed perinde cum illis agetur ac si haberent in seipsis exactam justitiam legalem Therefore the Justification and Salvation of Believers does not depend on this that they have such an internal Righteousness as they dare submit to a legal Tryal and to the strict and rigorous Judgment of God but that by and for the Merits of their Redeemer hey shall never undergo such a Judgment but shall be dealt with as if they had an exact legal Righteousness of their own And this he tells us hemeans by the Merits of Christ being the formal cause of our Iustification and in this sense I heartily own it though the abuse of that Phrase is a sufficient Reason to alter it Let us now consider in the third place what is required on our part in order to our Justification by Gods Mercy and by Christs Merits and that is plainly expressed in the Homily And upon our part true and lively Faith in the Merits of Iesus Christ which yet is not ours but by Gods working in us That we may the better understand this we must enquire What is meant by this Faith in the Merits of Christ And what is meant by a true and lively Faith in Christs Merits And what our Church attributes to this Faith in the Work of Justification First What is meant by Faith in the Merits of Christ Now the general Notion of Faith is that it is a perswasion and belief in mans heart whereby he knoweth that there is a God and agreeth unto all Truth of Gods most holy Word contained in the holy Scripture This is such a Faith as Devils and wicked Men may have But then a Faith in Christs Merits or a true justifying Faith such as no wicked men can have is not only the common belief of the Articles of Faith but it is also a true trust and confidence of the Mercy of God through our Lord Jesus Christ and a sted fast hope of all good things to be received at Gods hand and that although we through infirmity or temptation of our ghostly Enemy do fall from him by sin yet if we return again to him by true Repentance that he will forgive and forget our offences for his Sons sake our Saviour Jesus Christ and will make us Inheritors with him of his everlasting Kingdom and that in the mean time till that Kingdom come he will be our Protector and Defender in all perils and dangers whatsoever do chance and that though sometimes he doth send us sharp adversity yet that evermore he will be a loving Father unto us if we trust in him and commit our selves wholly unto him hang only upon him and call upon him ready to obey and serve him That is a Faith in the Merits of Christ is a sure Hope and Confidence in God a certain Expectation of all temporal and spiritual good things from God for the Merits of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ upon the condition of Repentance and a new Life or as it is excellently expressed a little after in the same Homily For the very sure and lively Christian Faith is not only to believe all things of God contained in holy Scripture but also is an earnest trust and confidence in God that he doth regard us and that he is careful over us as the Father is over the Child whom he doth love and that he will be merciful to us for his only Sons sake and that we have our Saviour Christ our perpetual Advocate and Priest in whose only Merits Oblation and Suffering we do trust that our Offences be continually washed and purged whensoever we repenting truly do return to him with our whole heart sted fastly determining with our selves through his Grace to obey and serve him in keeping his Commandments and never to turn back again to sin So that Justifying Faith according to the sense of our Church is not a perswasion that our sins are actually pardoned or that God for Christs sake will forgive our sins without requiring any more of us than to believe that he will forgive them But it is a firm perswasion that God will forgive our sins for Christs sake if we repent of our sins and forsake them and determine through his gracious assistance never to return to them again But we shall understand this the better if we consider secondly what is meant by a true lively Faith in Christs Merits for our Church distinguishes between a dead and a lively Faith A dead Faith is by the holy Apostle St. James compared to the faith of Devils which believe God to be true and just and tremble for fear yet they do nothing well but all evil And such a manner of Faith have the wicked and naughty Christian People which confess God as St. Paul saith in their mouth but deny him in their deeds being abominable and without the right faith and to all good works reprovable And Forasmuch as Faith without Works is dead it is not now Faith as a dead Man is not a Man This dead Faith therefore is not the sure and substantial Faith which saveth Sinners Let us now consider what a lively Faith is and the description of that follows in these words Another Faith there is in
Scripture which is not as the foresaid Faith idle unfruitful and dead but worketh by Charity as St. Paul declareth Gal. v. which as the other vain Faith is called a dead Faith so this may be called a quick or lively Faith This is the true lively and unfeigned Christian Faith and is not in the mouth and outward Profession only but it liveth and stirreth inwardly in the heart And this Faith is not without hope and trust in God nor without the love of God and of our Neighbours nor without the fear of God nor without the desire to hear Gods Word and to follow the same in eschewing evil and doing gladly all good works This Faith as St. Paul describes it is the sure ground and foundation of the benefits which we ought to look for and trust â—o receive of God a certificate and sure looking for them although they yet sensibly appear not unto us c. This I think is as plain as words can make it that the only Foundation of our Hope and Trust in God and of our expectation of all temporal and spiritual good things from him is a lively and working Faith and upon these terms I will dispute with no man I never asserted more my self nor desire any other man should But to make it more evident what the sense of our Church is concerning the necessity of Good Works we are taught in these Homilies three things concerning Faith First That it is essential to true Faith to be fruitful in good Works when it hath the Opportunities of Action This Faith doth not lie dead in the heart but is lively and fruitful in bringing forth good Works That as the Light cannot be hid but will shew forth it self at one place or other so a true Faith cannot be kept secret but when occasion is offered it will break out and shew it self by Good Works And as the living Body of a Man ever exerciseth such things as belong to a natural and living Body for nourishment and preservation of the same as it hath need opportunity and occasion even so the Soul that hath a lively Faith in it will be doing alway some good Work which shall declare that it is living and will not be unoccupied Therefore when men hear in the Scriptures so high commendation of Faith that it maketh us to please God to live with God and to be the Children of God If then they phantasie that they be set at liberty from doing all good Works and may live as they lust they trifle with God and deceive themselves and it is a manifest token that they be far from having the true lively Faith also far from knowledge what true Faith meaneth And then follows that excellent Description of Faith which I have transcribed above From this it is very plain that our Church accounts a holy Life as essential to a true Faith as Action is to Life and that true Faith is discovered by a holy Life just as an inward Principle of Life is discovered by external and visible Actions This is farther proved in the Homily from the examples of all good men in former Ages whose Faith was fruitful in good Works such as Abel Noah Abraham Isaac Iacob c. and from the Testimony of the holy Scripture especially of the 1 Epist. of S. Iohn where there are so many express testimonies to this Truth and by refuting the several pretences of those men who fancy that they believe in God and love him though they either live in sin or neglect to obey his Laws the conclusion of all is in these words So they that be Christians and have received the knowledge of God and of Christs Merits and yet of a set purpose do live idly without good works thinking the name of a naked faith to be either sufficient for them or else setting their minds upon vain pleasures of this World do live in sin without repentance not uttering the Fruits that do belong to such an high Profession upon such presumptuous Persons and wilful Sinners must needs remain the great vengeance of God and eternal punishment in Hell prepared for the unjust and wicked Livers The second thing which we are taught of Faith is That Faith is the only Principle of Good Works acceptable and pleasing to God that without it can no good Work be done accepted and pleasant unto God for as a Branch cannot bear Fruit of it self saith our Saviour Christ except it abide in the Vine so cannot you except you abide in me And without Faith it is impossible to please God And whatever work is done without Faith is sin Faith giveth life to the Soul and they be as much dead to God who lack Faith as they be to the World whose Bodies lack Souls This is a true account why no Works though they may appear never so good can be acceptable to God without Faith because Faith is the only Principle of a new and spiritual Life which makes us alive to God which gives us such a sense of God and reverence for his Authority as makes us careful in all things to please him which is the very life and soul of Religion and all Vertue and as it is observed in that Homily from St. Chrysostom As men that be very men indeed first have life and after be nourished so must our Faith in Christ go before and after be nourished with good Works A Life may be without Nourishment that is for some short time but Nourishment cannot be without Life A man must needs be nourished by good Works but first he must have Faith He that doth good Deeds yet without Faith he hath no Life Much to the same purpose it is observed from St. Augustine That the intent maketh the Works good but Faith must guide and order the intent of Man So that he which doth not his good Works with a godly intent a true Faith that worketh by Love the whole Body besides that is to say all the whole number of his Works is dark and hath no light in them for good Deeds be not measured by the facts themselves and so discerned from Vices but by the ends and intents for which they were done The meaning then of our Church is no more but this That whereas without Faith no man can love and reverence God or design to please him in all things whatever materially Good Works such men may do yet they are not properly Acts of Religion as not being referred to God and therefore cannot be acceptable to God as such nor avail any man to eternal Life Upon this account it is that God so much prizes Faith because it is the Seed and Principle of Universal Obedience that when there is such a sincere Principle in us and wants an opportunity of exerting it self it is accepted by God without Works as is observed in the same place from St. Chrysostom I can shew a man that by Faith without Works
lived and came to Heaven but without Faith never any man had Life the Thief that was hanged when Christ suffered did believe only and the most merciful God justified him though as Bishop Davenant observes his Faith produced a great many good Works in a very short time but then it follows If he had lived and not regarded Faith and the Works thereof he should have lost his Salvation again but this is the effect that I say that Faith by it self saved him but Works by themselves never justified any man Where he prefers Faith above Works because Faith being a Universal Principle of Obedience is accepted by God without Works when there wants time or opportunity to act them though in no other case but no Works can be pleasing and acceptable to God unless they proceed from a true and hearty Faith Neither Faith is without Works having opportunity thereto nor Works can avail to everlasting Life without Faith The third thing noted of Faith is What manner of Good Works Faith produces and the Good Works of Faith are not some external Acts of Hypocrisie or some worthless and flattering Devotions not some Arbitrary Superstitions c. but are the substantial Duties of Religion which consist in the love of God and of Men which make us like to God and useful to the World as is excellently discoursed in the Second and Third parts of the Homily of Good Works So that according to the sense of our Church Justifying Faith is not an idle and unactive Principle but is fruitful in Good Works and no other Faith can justifie us but such a lively Faith as abounds in all the Fruits of Righteousness according as it hath occasion and opportunity of doing good But to make this still more evident I observe farther that whereas our Church seems to lay the greatest stress upon one particular Act of Faith in the matter of Justification viz. our trust in the Mercy of God and our apprehending the Promise of Forgiveness through the Merits of our Lord Jesus Christ she also makes a good Life or at least a firm and stedfast Resolution of a good Life antecedently necessary to this Justifying Act of Faith or to our Trust and Affiance in the Mercy of God through the Merits of our Lord and Saviour This is evident from that Reason which is assigned why no wicked men can have a sure Trust and Confidence in Gods Mercy For how can any man have this true Faith this sure confidence in God that by the Merits of Christ his sins be forgiven and be reconciled to the favour of God and to be partaker of the Kingdom of Heaven by Christ when he liveth ungodly and denieth Christ in his Deeds Surely no such ungodly man can have this Faith and trust in God For as they know Christ to be the only Saviour of the World so they know also that wicked men shall not enjoy the Kingdom of God They know that God hateth Unrighteousness that he will destroy all those that speak untruly that those who have done good Works which cannot be done without a lively Faith in Christ shall come forth into the Resurrection of Life and those that have done evil shall come unto the Resurrection of Iudgment Very well they know also that to them that be contentious and to them that will not be obedient unto the Truth but will obey Unrighteousness shall come indignation wrath and affliction c. The plain meaning of which words is this that no wicked man can have a true Faith in Gods Mercy because the Promise of forgiveness is made upon the Conditions of Repentance and a New Life whereas God hath threatned eternal damnation against all wicked Livers and therefore for any man while he lives in wickedness to hope to be pardoned by God for Christs sake is an express contradiction to the Promises and Threatnings of the Gospel and surely no man shall be justified for believing a lie Thus in the first part of the Sermon of Faith the design of which is to prove that a true lively justifying Faith is fruitful in Good Works we are expresly taught That he that believeth that all that is spoken of God in the Bible is true and yet liveth so ungodly that he cannot look to enjoy the Promises and Benefits of God although it may be said that such a man hath a Faith and Belief to the Words of God yet it is not properly said that he believeth in God or hath such a Faith and Trust in God whereby he may surely look for Grace Mercy and everlasting Life at Gods hands but rather for indignation and punishment according to the merits of his wicked Life This contains the very same Doctrine which was expressed in the former Paragraph farther gives us an account what distinction our Church makes between Credere Deo Credere in Deum to believe God and to believe in God the first signifies to believe whatever is contained in the Word of God to be true the second is to yield such Obedience to the Revelations of the Divine Will as may encourage us to trust in God for the Accomplishment of all those gracious Promises of Pardon and Eternal Life This is all the fiducial Reliance which our Church teacheth to trust to the Mercy of God through the Merits of Christ for Pardon and Eternal Life upon our faithful discharge of all Gospel-Obedience The same Doctrine is more expresly taught if it be possible in the Second Part of the Sermon of Faith Verily verily I say unto you He that believeth in me hath everlasting Life Now forasmuch as he that believeth in Christ hath everlasting Life it must needs consequently follow that he that hath this Faith must have also Good Works and be studious to observe Gods Commandments obediently For to them that have evil Works and lead their Life in Disobedience and Transgression or breaking Gods Commandments without Repentance pertaineth not everlasting Life but everlasting Death as Christ himself saith They that do well shall go into Life eternal but they that do evil shall go into everlasting fire c. What can be more expresly said to prove the inseparable Union of Good Works with Faith in the Act of Justification In the Homily of Repentance this Doctrine is so plainly taught that there can be no possible evasion We are there told That the true Preachers of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven and of the glad and joyful tidings of Salvation have always in their godly Sermons and Preachings unto the People joyned these two together Repentance and Forgiveness of sins even as our Saviour Jesus Christ did appoint himself saying So it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise again the third day and that Repentance and Forgiveness of Sins should be preached in his Name among all Nations Forgiveness of sins as I observed before is Evangelical Justification and the necessary condition of Forgiveness is Repentance This is proved in that
Homily by many Scripture-Promises and Examples and therefore we must consider what our Church means by Repentance and the explication of this is reduced to four principal Points From what we must return to whom we must return by whom we may be able to convert and the manner how to turn to God First From whence or from what things we must return and that is From all our sins not only grosser vices but the filthy lusts and inward concupiscences of the Flesh. All these things must they forsake that will truly turn unto the Lord and repent aright For sith for such things the wrath of God cometh upon the Children of Disobedience no end of punishment ought to be look'd for as long as we continue in such things But this must be done by Faith for sith that God is a Spirit he can by no other means be apprehended and taken hold upon That is God being a Spirit we cannot see him with bodily Eyes nor go to him on our Legs nor take hold of him with an Arm of Flesh and therefore this Metaphor of returning to God and going to him and taking hold of him must be expounded to a spiritual sense is the work of Faith which discovers him who is invisible and unites our Souls and Spirits to him And We have need of a Mediator for to bring and reconcile us unto him who for our sins is angry with us the same is Jesus Christ who being true and natural God c. took our nature upon him that so he might be a Mediator between God and us and pacifie his wrath In the second part of the Homily we have this general Description of Repentance That it is a true Returning unto God whereby men forsaking utterly their Idolatry and Wickedness do with a lively Faith embrace love and worship the true living GOD only and give themselves to all manner of good Works which by Gods Word they know to be acceptable unto him And we are there informed That there are four Parts of Repentance the first is Contrition of the Heart For we must be earnestly sorry for our sins and unfeignedly lament and bewail that we have by them so grievously offended our most bounteous and merciful God c. The second is an unfeigned Confession and acknowledging of our sins to God The third is Faith whereby we do apprehend and take hold upon the Promises of God touching the free pardon and forgiveness of our sins which Promises are sealed up unto us with the death and blood-shedding of the Lord Jesus Christ. And the Reason of this is because Contrition and Confession will avail us nothing unless we stedfastly believe and be fully perswaded that God for his Son Jesus Christs sake will forgive us all our sins for though we be never so earnestly sorry for our sins and acknowledge and confess them yet all these things shall be but means to bring us to utter desparation except we do stedfastly believe that God our heavenly Father will for his Son Jesus Christs sake pardon and forgive us our Offences and Trespasses and utterly put them out of remembrance in his sight therefore they that teach Repentance without Christ and a lively Faith in the Mercy of God do only teach Cains or Iudas Repentance That is they teach men to be sorry for their sins without any hopes of Pardon and Forgiveness which is only to be obtained through our Lord Jesus Christ. The fourth part of Repentance is an amendment of Life in bringing forth fruits worthy of Repentance for they that do truly repent must be clean alter'd and changed they must become New Creatures they must be no more the same that they were before As appears from Iohn the Baptists Exhortation to the Scribes and Pharisees whereby we do learn that if we will have the wrath of God to be pacified we must in no wise dissemble but turn unto him again with a true and sound Repentance which may be known and declared by good Fruits as by most sure and infallible signs thereof This I think is as plain as words can make it that Repentance which consists in a hearty sorrow for all our sins and in a humble Confession of them to Almighty God and in a sincere Faith and Trust in the Mercies of God through our Lord Jesus Christ together with an actual amendment of our lives is according to the sense of our Church absolutely necessary to obtain the pardon of our sins that is Iustification by the free Grace of God This has often made me wonder that any one should affix such a Doctrine as this to the Church of England That Repentance it self is not antecedently necessary to our Iustification I am sure the Learned Bishop Davenant was of another mind in this point for he expresly asserts that there are some Works sine quibus Iustificatio nunquam fuit ab ullo mortalium obtenta nunquam obtinebitur without which Justification never was and never shall be obtained by any mortal man among which he reckons true Repentance and Faith and the love of God and of our Neighbour Haec hujusmodi opera cordis interna sunt omnibus justificatis necessaria non quod contineant in se efficaciam seu meritum Iustificationis sed quod juxta ordinationem divinam vel requiruntur ut conditiones praeviae seu concurrentes sicuti poenitere credere vel ut effecta à fide justificante necessario manantia ut amare Deum c. i. e. These and such-like internal Works of the Heart are necessary to all that are justified not that they are meritorious Causes of Justification but because according to the Divine Appointment they are required either as previous or concurring conditions such as Repentance and Faith or as effects which necessarily flow from a justifying Faith such as to love God c. Where this Learned Prelate doth expresly assert that Repentance as well as Faith is a previous Condition of our Justification and I fear will hereafter be accounted one of our Innovators And that distinction which the Bishop makes between those Works which are required as previous Conditions of Justification as to repent and believe and those Works which are necessary Effects of justifying Faith which must always be present in the justified Person as to love God c. gives a plain and easie answer to the grand Exception against the antecedent necessity of Repentance to our Justification viz. Because then it must precede Faith it self I suppose because every true Believer is actually justified in the first instant of his being a true Believer whereas all good Works and therefore Repentance and Contrition which are certainly good Works are the Effects and Fruits of Faith and so consequently must follow our Justification by Faith unless we will place the Effects before their Cause But this is absolutely false that all good Works are the effects and fruits of justifying Faith for there are some good Works which
the fruit of this We are thereby made the righteousness of God in him if we be righteousness where is our sinfulness to be charged upon us And he adds Many think there is such a kind of sinfulness that is a bar to them that though they would have Christ yet there is not a way open for them to take him Beloved there is no way of sinfulness to debar thee from coming to Christ if thou hast a heart to come to him and to venture thy self with joy against all objections into the bosome of Christ to discharge thee of all thy sinfulness And the Mystery of this he immediately explains The truth is men doat upon the establishing of their own righteousness to bring them to Christ and it is but presumptuous or licentious Doctrine That Christ may be their trust and they receive him and they considered simply ungodly as enemies Now one Egg is not more like another than this Doctrine is like what we find in M. Shephard Watson and D. Owen as evidently appears from those many passages cited from them in my former discourse Thus to proceed Dr. Crisp observes That Christ is a free way to all sorts of persons none excepted none prohibited for a Drunkard for a Whore-master for a Harlot an enemy to Christ. Or in Dr. Owens Phrase For the greatest the oldest the stubbornest transgressour And what Dr. Owen pleads for himself that he only represented such grace in Christ as should encourage all sorts of persons to come to him will serve Dr. Crisp as well as himself For he expresly adds Do not mistake me I do not say Christ is a free way to walk in him and yet to continue in such a condition but for entrance into him Christ is as free a way for the vilest sort of sinners as for any persons under heaven That is the worst man in the world may have as good an interest in Christ for Justification and Eternal life as the best but when Christ has got him he will make him good Of which more anon Thus Christ is a near way to the Father he brings the Father unto men and becomes such a way as that there is but one step from the lowest condition of sinfulness to the highest of being the Son of God That is he who receives Christ though at that instant of receiving him he be the greatest sinner in the world yet in the next moment is the Son of God and perfectly innocent and righteous with the righteousness of Christ and heir of eternal life And to take notice but of one passage more Christ is a spacious large elbow-room way When a man enters into Christ he enters into liberty and freedom But how is it said then Srait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life Answer By the straitness of the way is not here meant strictness of conversation But it is strait and narrow in this regard that all a mans own righteousness must be cut out of the way it must be so narrow that there must be nothing in the way but Christ which is exactly parallel with Dr. Owen's chastity of our affections to Christ in not taking any thing as our own righteousness into our affections and esteem for those ends and purposes for which we have received Christ that is not to contribute any thing to our Justification or Salvation This is the effect of making the Person of Christ in contradistinction from his Laws and Religion the immediate way unto the Father It were easie to give numerous instances of this nature but these may suffice to satisfie any intelligent man that all those precious and charming discourses of the Beauty and Loveliness and Fulness and Riches and Righteousness of Christ and of wooing and winning Souls to Christ as they are managed by these men are as formal hypocrisies as Iudas his Salutation of his Master when he betrayed him for the plain design is to advance his Person to the prejudice of his Laws and Religion whoever sends sinners immediately and directly to the Person of Christ for Righteousness and Justification and Eternal life without first requiring Repentance and the Love of God and at least the sincere purposes of a new life to entitle them to Grace and Mercy are down-right Antinomians whoever place the Essence of a justifying Faith in a meer fiducial reliance on Christ and a fancifull application of Christs Righteousness to themselves place all their hopes immediately on the Person of Christ which is to make a new Religion of Christ's Person in opposition to his Gospel But fifthly I observe farther That the Church of England makes Repentance and the Love of God and the sincere purposes of a New life antecedently necessary to our Justification as appears from what I have discoursed above but these men absolutely deny that Repentance or the Love of God or any other internal Grace or Vertue are necessary to our Justification by the Righteousness of Christ but that we are justified before and without them at least in order of nature There are none of them indeed deny that those who are justified ought to live holily but yet they assert that God hath no regard to Repentance and Holiness in the Justification of a sinner but that all these follow our Justification as the effects and fruits of it God justifies the ungodly in a proper sense while they are ungodly but whom he justifies he sanctifies too and makes them holy Now if any man should enquire what great difference there is between these two since the necessity of Holiness is universally acknowledge I answer the difference is just as much as between the necessity of an Event and the necessity of Duty which I think is a very material difference in matters of Religion to place Holiness after Justification as a necessary effect and consequent of it acknowledges the necessity of Holiness as to the Event that those who are justified shall be sanctified but it destroys the necessity of Duty and undermines all the Arguments to a Holy life God may sanctifie us if he pleases by an irresistible and uncontroulable Power but there is no necessary Argument left to induce us as free Agents to purifie our selves and to co-operate with the Divine Grace which makes the whole Gospel and all the External Ministeries of Religion useless the great design of which is to furnish us with such cogent and perswasive Arguments as by the concurring assistance of the Divine Grace may effectually bow our Wills and govern our Affections and transform us into a Divine Nature If we are justified without Repentance and a New life if God accepts our Persons as Just and Righteous only for the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us and this gives us an actual Title to Life and Immortality what reason can there be assigned so cogent as to conquer our love to Sin when there is no Argument to work either upon our Hopes or
Fears The Hope of Heaven and the Fear of Hell are the great Motives of the Gospel but are of no use in this new Religion since a justified Person who yet may be very wicked is in no danger of Hell and is secure of his Inheritance in Heaven For if a justified person may miss of Heaven and fall into Hell his Justification is worth nothing a man had as good be Unjustified as to perish with his Justification And therefore though God if he pleases may sanctifie whom he first justifies yet there is no Argument left to perswade a justified person to be holy if he may be justified without it This I particularly shewed in my former Discourse where I examined Dr. Owens Reasons for the necessity of Holiness which either prove nothing or prove only the necessity of Event that God will necessarily make men holy not such a necessity of Duty as will make every considering man who hath any value for his Soul freely chuse Holiness But instead of answering what I there urged the Doctor in his Vindication transcribes a long Paragraph concerning the necessity of Holiness and leaves it to the judgment of his Readers which I must needs say was very boldly done if he thought his Readers had any judgment though it argued more craft to give me a fresh challenge as if I had yet said nothing to him The Doctor only takes notice of two or three things which I answered to his Reasons for the necessaty of Holiness and passes over all the rest as unanswerable scoffing which is his way to call that scoffing which he cannot answer As first he proved the necessity of Holiness from the command of God which had been a good Argument had it been used by another man but the Doctors Notion of Justification by the imputed Righteousness of Christ only evacuates this command and therefore I enquired where is the Sanction of this Law will he damn those who do not obey for their disobedience And will he save and reward those who do obey for their obedience Not a word of this for this destroys our Iustification by the Righteousness of Christ only And if after all these Commands God hath left it indifferent whether we obey or not I hope such Commands cannot make Obedience necessary This last Clause the Doctor recites and cries out 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. This I confess is wonderful Divinity but I know no reason the Doctor should wonder at it because it is his own For such indifferent things he makes all the Divine Commands while he makes them unnecessary to our Justification which quite destroys their Authority and Sanction For a Law if it may be so called without Rewards and Punishments is left at the liberty of the Subject to obey it or not and such a Command cannot make Obedience necessary But the Doctor proceeds But may we not notwithstanding this Command be justified and saved without this Holiness Wherein he designs to represent my Sense though he have changed the words and answers false and impertinent we are neither justified nor saved without them though we are not justified by them nor saved for them This is warily expressed but will not serve his purpose for by our not being justified without Holiness he means no more than that God at the same time when he justifies infuses the Habits of Grace and Holiness renews and sanctifies us too and therefore we cannot be said to be justified without Holiness because we are justified and sanctified at the same instant though in order of nature we are Justified before we are Sanctified and therefore in our Justification God had no respect to any sly Antecedent Holiness which as to the present Dispute is the same thing as to be Justified without Holiness The Doctor professes it as his avowed Doctrine That Holiness and Obedience is neither the Cause Matter nor Condition of our Iustification and therefore not Antecedently necessary And expresly tells us That the Passive Righteousness of Christ only is imputed to us in the non-imputation of Sin and that on the condition of our Faith and new Obedience so exalting them into the room of the Righteousness of Christ is a thing which in Communion with the Lord Iesus I have as yet no acquaintance withal And a little before Are we then freed from this Obedience Yes But how far From doing it in our own strength from doing it for this end That we may obtain Life Everlasting It is vain that some say confidently that we must yet work for Life it is all one as to say That we are yet under the Old Covenant Hoc fac vives we are not freed from Obedience as a way of walking with God but we are as a way of working to come to him So that Holiness contributes nothing to our Justification and Eternal life and therefore we may as well be justified and saved without them which destroys the Necessity and Sanction of the Divine Laws and leaves it at every mans liberty to Obey or not to Obey were they not over-ruled like spiritual Machines and Engines by an irresistible Power In the next place the Doctor proves the necessity of Holiness from the Ends of God in Election and Redemption God Elected us and Christ Redeemed us that we might be holy This is a very good Argument too if it be rightly managed but that it can never be upon the Doctors Principles that is if we deny the Antecedent necessity of Holiness to our Justification For if God have absolutely Elected us to Eternal Life without any condition required on our part only purposing to make those holy by an irresistible Power whom he hath Elected this only proves the necessity of the Event that those who are Elected shall be holy but can be no Argument to engage any man to press after Holiness For this Election to Holiness doth not make Holiness necessary on our part with the necessity of Duty or of a Condition without which we shall not be saved but only makes it necessary on Gods part as to the regular execution of his Decree of Salvation And the same may be said of Redemption if we are so absolutely Redeemed by the Death of Christ as to have a right to all the benefits of it as Justification and Eternal Life without any condition required on our part If we are justified freely by the Grace of God through the Redemption which is in Christ Iesus without any regard to Repentance or New Obedience to qualifie us for this Grace then our Redemption by Christ cannot make it a necessary Duty in us to be holy though Holiness may follow as a necessary Effect This I expressed in fewer words but to the same sense in my former Discourse Will the Father Elect and the
and stead of particular persons then those for whom he acted are absolved and justified by the undertaking or actual performance of Christ either from Eternity or from the first moment of their being I might add several other Consequences which necessarily result from this Doctrine and are the peculiar Principles of Antinomianism as that we must not pray for the forgiveness of sins because they are long since removed by the death of Christ but only for the sense of this forgiveness that God sees no sin in his people because their sins are laid on Christ and that therefore we must not lay sin upon our own Consciences neither unless we will make our Conscience a Christ But this is enough to shew how fruitful this Principle is of absurdities and what reason I have to reject our Union to the Person of Christ considered as one who hath done all for us in our name and stead And now I need not insist long on the second thing proposed viz. our immediate Union to the Person of Christ For though all Christians are in some sense immediately united to Christ as I have shewn above yet in the Antinomian sense of an immediate Union I do utterly reject it whereby they understand an Union to the Person of Christ without any intervening Conditions on our part And this they must necessarily do according to their notion of the Person of Christ. They explain this as I observed in my former Discourse by a Conjugal Relation and a Legal Union As for a Conjugal Relation which consists in such a Union of Persons as is between a Man and his Wife which intitles us to all the personal excellencies and perfections Beauty Comeliness Riches and Righteousness of Christ as Marriage intitles a Woman to her Husbands Estate and secures us from the Wrath of God and the Accusations of the Law as a woman under Covert is not liable to any Action or Arrest I perceive Mr. Ferguson gives it over as indefensible for among all the sorts of Unions which he reckons up he takes no notice of this which is the most charming and inviting Union and most acceptable to the Sisterhood the best Friends to Conventicles of any other But I suppose Mr. Vincent will not give it over so and therefore I observe that this must be an immediate Union which requires nothing else but an embracing and clasping Faith which unites their persons to each other This Faith is no condition of Union but only such a consent to have Christ as is necessary to make the Match or rather like joyning hands which is the Ceremony of Marriage Though indeed the Marriage was made before as they say all Marriages are in Heaven Eternal Election marries them to Christ and this consenting Faith gives them only a comfortable sense of their Matrimonial Union as will appear by considering the nature of Legal Union whereby we are united to Christ as to our Surety and Mediator who does all for us in our name and stead Now it is a plain demonstration that this Union to Christ as to our Surety and Mediator is immediate for it is entirely Gods act in electing some particular persons and giving them to Christ to do all for them in their name and stead And therefore Dr. Crisp truly argues that it is God and only God that can lay our sins upon Christ that our Repentance and Faith and new Obedience cannot do it For this work of laying sin on Christ in making him our Surety to do all for us was done long since and is not to be done now Christ hath already died for all that he will die for and if he did not die for us nothing that we can do now can lay our sins upon him For as the Doctor reasons if we could a fresh by our Repentance and Faith lay our sins on Christ as our Surety how should he get rid of them again For there is no getting rid of sin but by dying for it and Christ hath already done that and is not to die again If Christ's Suretiship consists in his dying and performing all righteousness for particular persons elected and chosen by God our Union to Christ as to our Surety must be from Eternity or at least from the time of his appearing in the world for if he did not act as our Surety then he cannot do so since unless we should suppose that he must come into the world again to act over the same part in the name and stead of those who were left out of the first Roll of Election and therefore I do not wonder that these men are so much blundered and talk backward and forward in those directions they give to their hearers how to get into Christ for the truth is if we are not in Christ already there is no getting into Christ now according to their Principles Election alone and Gods giving us to Christ unites us to him not any act of our own neither Faith Repentance or new Obedience these at best can only give us a comfortable sense of our Union to Christ but can contribute nothing at all to our Union it self And therefore Dr. Owen does roundly acknowledge that Christ is reckoned to us in order of nature before we believe and by Gods reckoning Christ to us he means the imputing of Christ unto ungodly unbelieving sinners for whom he died so far as to account him theirs to bestow Faith and Grace upon them for his sake And if God reckon Christ to men before Faith he must reckon him theirs from the time of his giving them to Christ for there can be no other reason of his reckoning Christ to them at all And to shew how free and absolute this gift of Christ is he tells us That there is no condition at all in this stipulation That God should engage upon the death of Christ to make out Grace and Glory Liberty and Beauty unto those for whom he died upon condition they do so or so leaves no proper place for the merit of Christ and is very improperly ascribed unto God And therefore though the Covenant of Grace seem to run conditionally that if we repent and believe we shall be saved yet the Covenant is indeed absolute because these very conditions are part of Christ's Purchase and are promised without any condition and though God will bring us to Heaven in such a way and method as he has thought fit to prescribe to himself for the Glory of the Trinity yet all this in all the parts of it is no less fully procured for us nor less freely bestowed on us for Christ's sake and on his account as part of his Purchase and Merits than if all of us immediately upon his death had been translated into heaven From all this it appears what they mean by an immediate Union to the Person of Christ such an Union to Christ as our Mediator and Surety as is founded only on Electing Grace without any
but commends that divine power and vertue which appeared in him and accounts this the best answer to the Arrians objection from these words That Christ was God participatione tantum gratiâ only by participation and by Grace On Ioh. 17. 21. That they all may be one as thou Father art in me and I in thee that they also may be one in us Mr. Calvin observes Tenendum est quoties unum se cum patre esse in hoc capite pronunciat Christus sermonem non habere simplicitèr de divinà ejus essentiâ sed unum vocari in personâ mediatoris quatenùs caput nostrum est That is we must acknowledge and own that as often as Christ calls himself one with the Father in this Chapter it does not simply and primarily refer to the unity of the Divine Essence but he is one with the Father considered as Mediator and head of the Church That is as he acts in Gods name and authority and does his will And he adds That many of the Fathers expound these words of Christs being one with the Father as he was Eternal God but this they were forced to by their contention with the Arrians longè autem aliud Christi consilium fuit quà m ad nudam arcanae suae divinit at is speculationem nos evehere But Christ had a quite different design in these words than to raise them to a naked contemplation of his secret and unsearchable divinity And now if Mr. Ferguson will be a just and impartial Judge he must accost Mr. Calvin as he has done me I would not be thought to impeach Mr. Calvin of opposing the Godhead of Christ but this I affirm that if his glosses of Col. 1. 19. Col. 2. 3. and 2. 8. Joh. 14. 20. Joh. 1. 14. and add Joh. 17. 21. which are as much the same as Mr. Sherlock's with those the Socinians impose upon those places be admitted we have some of the main proofs of it wrested out of our hands But to proceed Dr. Owen hath given in his charge against me very fully and emphatically He that shall consider what reflexions are cast in this discourse on the necessity of satisfaction to be made unto divine Iustice and from whom they are borrowed the miserable weak attempt that is made therein to reduce all Christ's mediatory actings to his Kingly Office and in particular his Intercession the faint mention that is made of the satisfaction of Christ clogged with the addition of ignorance of the Philosophy of it as it is called well enough complying with them who grant that the Lord Christ did what God was satisfied withal with sundry other things of the like nature will not be to seek whence these things come nor whither they are going nor to whom our Author is beholden for most of his rare notions which it is an easie thing at any time to acquaint him withal The Doctors chief skill lies in scandalous insinuations but he is just like other men when he comes to reason As for that attempt to reduce all Christ's Mediatory actings to his Kingly Office I have given a sufficient account of that in answer to Mr. Ferguson and suppose I shall hear no more of it As for my faint mention of the satisfaction of Christ clogged with an ignorance of the Philosophy of it what he calls a faint mention I cannot tell but I did more than once expresly assert it and that very heartily but I must beg his pardon that I dare not pretend to understand the strict Philosophy of that Atonement made by Christ so long as I assert that every Christian may easily learn all that is useful and necessary for him to know We may all know whatever the Scripture has revealed about it that Christ died for our sins that he died for us that he is a propitiation for the sins of the whole world that we are reconciled to God by the death of his Son that his bloud is the bloud of the Covenant that he has redeemed his Church with his own bloud and hath purchased and ratified the New Testament with his bloud which gives us the greatest assurance of the pardon of our sins and the promises of eternal life upon the conditions of a lively active faith which is made perfect by works But then there are some enquiries concerning this matter of a nicer speculation as wherein the proper nature of atonement and expiation consists in what sense the death of Christ may be said to satisfie the justice of God whether Christ died as the Surety of particular Persons or as the Surety of the Covenant whether Christ suffered the Idem or the tantundem what is the immediate effect of Christs death whether to give an actual right to those for whom he died to pardon and life or to seal the Covenant of grace with mankind and to put all men into a possibility of salvation I presume the Doctor knows that these and a great many more such questions are hotly disputed among those very men who do not use to make a very faint mention neither of the satisfaction of Christ and methinks the Doctor should for once have commended the young mans modesty that he would not peremptorily determine these matters rather than blame me for professing my ignorance And as for what the Doctor adds that this favours of a compliance with them who grant that the Lord Christ did what God was satisfied withal If I mistake not this is the utmost of what he himself can bring it to whether right or wrong I shall not now determine for he expresly affirms that Christ could not merit of God with that kind of merit which ariseth from an absolute proportion of things and gives this wise reason for it because Christ in respect of his humane nature though united to the Deity is a Creature and so could not absolutely satisfie nor merit any thing at the hand of God This merit from an absolute proportion can be found only among Creatures and the advancement of Christs humanity takes it not out of that number neither in this sense can any satisfaction be made to God for sin And therefore he founds the merit and satisfaction of Christ upon Gods constitution and determination predestinating Christ unto that work and appointing the work by him to be accomplished to be satisfactory equalling by that constitution the end and the means Which at most signifies no more but this that what Christ did was not in its own nature satisfactory but was only what God was satisfied with upon account of his own constitution and determination And therefore all the merit the Doctor ascribes to Christ is the accomplishment of that condition which God required to make way that the Obligation which he had freely put upon himself might be in actual force Which he says is no more than what Mr. Baxter assigns to our own works By which we may learn what a lame and conditional merit