it in us how shall we distinguish between Precepts and Promises I am sorry to see such a manly Divine as Mr. Eyre to be at a non-plus where there is no difficulty I take it for granted that any Member in Mr. Eyre's Church can shew where faith is commanded and therefore it lieth upon us as a duty and yet also can shew where it is said to be the gift of God Surely if the same thing may not be commanded and promised either we have no duty to performe or God hath not promised to give what he requireth or us for it is said he hath wrought all our works in us â—â—a 16.12 and for us and yet he calls it our work still because our duty and act though it be his grace inabling us he commandeth us to repent Mark 3.2 yet Christ is exalted as a Prince to give repentance to Israel Acts 5.31 We grant it cannot be a condition and a promise if you take a condition in a strict proper sense as the Jurists and Arminians take it for a condition performed by our own free will but we take it in another sense for a suspensive condition of the efficacy of Christs death and this is essential to a condition appointed by God to apply Christs righteousnesse to us which condition he hath purposed to work and Christ hath merited and therefore shall be infallibly given and therefore the benefit of Christs death is no lesse certain then if it were actually enjoyed 2. The Arminians hold that no mans will is predetermined by God for fear they should destroy the liberty of his will and Mr. Eyre saith in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Parliament Though God doth move effectually and perswades mens hearts yet he doth not necessitate them to believe If he mean it of a necessity of coaction only we grant it but if of necessity of infallibility and event we deny it and he agreeth with Arminius for God doth so effectually move as to necessitate them and irresistibly worketh upon their wills over-powering them and of unwilling making them willing that they necessarily do believe though they freely do it at the same time Secondly He chargeth us that dissent from him in making Faith the condition of the Covenant as if we did agree with Arminians Socinians and Papists when he is not ignorant that we manifestly differ from them and own not faith as a condition in any of their senses we make it not any meritorious condition as the Papists nor any act performed by our own free will as Arminians nor the matter of our righteousnesse as Socinians and Arminians and Papists do neither in whole nor in part And somewhere he saith in his Book that Mr Calvin hath observed That if we were accorded with the Church of Rome in all other points save in this to wit of Justification it were impossible to be reconciled and I must needs say I see no materiall difference between them meaning between us that differ from him and the Papists and yet pag. 50. he saith that Bellarmine saith Bellar. de justific l. 1. c. 17. Faith it self is our righteousnesse and that it doth justifie us impetrando promerendo in choando justificationem that it doth obtain merit and begin our Justification which of the Orthodox saith so or with the Arminians that in the Covenant of Grace God requireth faith which in his gracious acceptation standeth instead of the obedience to the Moral Law But to this wilfull slander I shall tell him what in this case is the judgement of learned VOSSIVS Vossius Praefatione to his defence of Grot. against Herm. Ravensp In confesso est apud omnes haereticis cum meliùs quà m Catholicis consulere qui callidum fidei Christianae hostem ità in tabellà populo spectandum offert quasi dogmati faveat Catholico cui bellum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indixit strenuum autem veritatis defensorem ità depingit quasi cum haeretico colludat quem fortiter oppugnat He is a better friend to Papists then Protestants who shall describe the Papists that erre fundamentally as favourably as the Protestants who hold the foundation and strenously defend it as if they did agree with Papists with whom they are at an irreconcileable difference Mr. Eyre p. 10. Thirdly Mr. Eyre maketh a sinner if he be an Elect person remaining under the reigning power of sin a subject of Justification For he saith God is well pleased with his Elect in Christ whilest they are unregenerate though he be not well pleased with their unregeneracy or any of their actions in their unregenerate estate But how can this be agreeable to the Holy Nature of God to justifie a sinner so remaining For he that in this sense justifieth the wicked is an abomination to the Lord and what God condemneth in us he will not do himself The Papists object against us that hold Justification by imputed and not inherent righteousnesse that it is contrary to the holinesse justice and purity of Gods Nature to justifie us that are ungodly without an inherent rightsousnesse To which the Protestants answer that God at the same time doth begin to sanctifie whom he doth justifie and he doth bestow a righteousnesse of Sanctification as well as of Justification but Mr. Eyre's opinion lieth justly liable to their exception God cannot justifie any person or be well pleased with him that is not a member of Christ and to make an unregenerate man a member of Christs body what a monstrous deformity would this be and wrong to Christ to make a limb of the Devil a member of Christ Let a man be the greatest sinner imaginable practising and delighting in sin yet he is a justified person and a member of Christ If Elect why doth Mr. Eyre require the members of his Church to be Saints not only by profession but by inward sanctification as that that shall make him a Church-member and yet holds an uregenerate person is a member of Christs body will he require more holinesse in a Church-member then in a Christ-member And what an unreasonable assertion is it for him to say God is pleased with the Elect whilest they are unregenerate though he be not well pleased with their unregeneracy or any of their actions in their unregenerate estate Is it possible God can be well pleased with their persons and yet none of all their actions please him is that tree a good tree that never did nor can bring forth good fruit As the Scripture maketh no mans actions accepted when their persons are not accepted so neither doth it make their persons acceptable but their actions some of them at least must be acceptable And if their persons be justified all their sins are pardoned and many of their actions are for the matter good and commanded and when all the sin in their best actions is done away how can they displease God seeing nothing displeaseth God but sin Fourthly He saith that the state
of the loved and hated Mr. Eyre p. 66. compared with pag. 5. are different in the minde of God yet not in the persons themselves till the different effects of love and hatred are put forth and yet findeth fault with me for asserting the same that there was no difference between the Elect and Reprobate as to their present condition whilest the Elect are unregenerate but only in the purpose of God intending to make a difference by bringing the Elect unto faith in Christ that they may be justified which was all I said or intended Fifthly He saith Gods eternall decree to justifie Mr. Eyre p. 64. compared with pag 140. is Justification because it secures men from wrath and by this immanent act of God they are discharged and acquitted from their sinnes Then what need Christ to die here is forgivenesse without a satisfaction Christs death was not the câ—use of this immanent act or will in God And yet he contradicteth himself for pag. 140. he saith that sin lay as a block in the way that God could not salvâ justititiâ bestow upon them those good things intended towards them in his eternal Election Surely Justification is one of the good things intended in Election and therefore God could not bestow this salvâ justitiâ till their sin was satisfied for but with him they were according to the first place discharged from sin by this immanent act yet Christs death was not a cause of this act and if they were actually discharged from sin how did that lie as a block in the way to hinder any of the good things intended And he citeth a place which he owneth out of Mr. Rutherford pag. 140. God might will unto us that which he cannot actually bestow upon us without wrong to his Justice and this he understands of Gods saving and pardoning us but if we were actually discharged we were actually pardoned and that without the merit of Christs death and satisfaction to his justice Sixthly He interpreteth pag. 60. what is meant by Gods sight when it is said We are justified in his sight this phrase he saith is variously used 1. Sometimes it relates unto the thoughts and knowledge of God c. 2. Sometimes it relates more peculiarly unto his legal justice and although in articulo providentiae in the Doctrine of Divine Providence seeing and knowing are all one yet in articulo justificationis in the article of Justification they are constantly distinguished throughout the Scripture and God is never said to blot our sins out of his knowledge but out of his sight Now saith he pag. 62. If we take it for the knowledge of God we were justified in his sight when he willed and determined in himself not to impute to us our sins c. and this was from eternity And with him the 63. pag. the essence and quiddity of Justification stands in this will of God not to punish this is properly Justification in his judgement and then God knew them to be righteous yet he saith in the article of Justification knowledge is constantly distinguished from sight throughout the whole Scripture and God is never said to blot sins out of his knowledge as much as if he should say If you take this phrase as it is never to be taken then we were justified from eternity And the Scripture doth not acknowledge this eternal Justification for when it speaks of the Doctrine of Justification it speaketh of blotting out sins out of his sight and this is to be referred to his legal Justice and this is the most proper and genuine use of it saith he and so we were justâ—fied in the sight of God when he exhibited and God accepted the full satisfaction in his blood for all our sins and yet this Justification is not the most proper acceptation of Justification for that was from eternity and yet we were then most properly justified in his sight how well this agrees let the Reader judge Seventhly He taketh Faith objectively Mr. Eyre p. 47. Pag. 58 76. not for the act with connotation of the object but for the object excluding the act as if the word Faith signified Christ and yet when we urge him with such places where it is said We are justified by Faith and the like he understands it of a declarative Justification and so taketh Faith subjâ—ctively not objectively So he taketh it p. 73. In this sense men are said to be justified by the act of Faith in regard Faith is the Medium or instrument whereby the sentence of forgivenesse is terminated on their conscience Eightly Pag. 63. He affirmeth that the judgement of Dr. Twisse is most accurate in placing the essence and quiddity of Justification in the will of God not to punish pag. 63. yet he saith and that truly in respect of this immanent and eternal act of God that the merits of Christ do not move Gods will not to punish or impute sinne to us yet he acknowledgeth no other act that Christs death is the meritorious cause of he saith it is the meritorious cause of the effects of this eternal Justification Pag. 67 but the Scripture maketh Christs death the meritorious cause of some act of God justifying us can Christ cause the effect and not the act Merit is an outward procatarâ—â—ical cause moving the principal agent extrinsecally ad agendum and hence God is said for Christs sake to forgive us Christs death doth morally work upon him by way of motive and objective moving and is a remote cause of the effect and God as the principall efficient is the immediate cause and what influence then can this remote cause have to produce the effects of Justification and no way by any causal influx to cause the act Though I still willingly acknowledge that the internal moving cause is Gods own will for nothing out of God can be the cause of his will unlesse we make God beholding to another for his being 9thly He giveth a very superficial slight answer to those Scriptures that speak of receiving remission of sins by believing Acts 10.43 Acts 26.18 Though it be said whosoever believeth shall receive remission of sin it is not said saith he by believing we obtain remission of sins true who would make an instrumentall cause the meritorious cause of remission of sins but if by obtaining be meant no more then a receiving and possessing what we never had before so we do by Faith obtain remission of sins he distinguisheth between the giving of remission and the receiving it as if one were long before the other To which I answer If you take giving for the will of God ordaining to give remission so it is long before receiving but that is not an actual bestowing of the thing purposed but if you take it for an actual collation of the thing given it implies the receiving of it for Relata se mutuo ponunt tollunt thus giving and receiving are together and so forgivenesse of
his eyes against the clear light of the Scripture Dreadful are Gods judgements in delivering men up to errour that will not receive the truth in the love of it Eleventhly Page 66 67. He maketh the merits of Christ no more the cause of Justification then of Election he maketh the merits of Christ only the meritorious cause of the effects of Gods eternall will to justifie as may appear pag. 66 67. Although saith he Gods will not to punish be antecedent to the death of Christ yet saith he we are justified in him but he doth not say for him though the Scriptures speak it plain enough because the whole effect of that will is by and for the sake of Christ as though electing love precedeth the consideration of Christ yet we are said to be chosen in him because all the effects of that love are given by and through and for him and to the like purpose he speaketh in the 67. pag. c. Col. 2.14 Heb. 9.12 But the Scriptures do plainly ascribe a meritoriousnesse to the death of Christ that we have redemption through his blood he hath obtained eternal redemption for us Eph. 4.32 Eph. 2.16 and that God for Christs sake had forgiven the Ephesians And that he hath reconciled both that is Jew and Gentle unto God by the Crosse and therefore Christ is not only the cause of the effects of Justification but of the act of Justification God being moved thereto by the death of Christ but where saith the Scripture that God elected us for the sake of Christ it is true it saith we were chosen in him and he accepted us in the beloved but this doth not imply that we had a being in Christ when elected and that God elected us for Christs sake as if Christ were the cause of our Election Vide Dr. Twiss Vind. Lib. 2. Digress p. 74. Interca non dicimus Christum in negotio electionis habere rationem causae meritoriae respectu actûs cligentis sed duntaxat respectu termini c. Ib. quoad actum eligentis which Arminius mightily contendeth for that he might bring in faith if not as a cause yet as a prerequisite of our Election And none of ours except Rolloc maintain it and yet though he calleth Christ the foundation of our Election all that he saith ends in this that Christ is therefore the foundation of our Election because he is the meritorious cause Bonorum Electione praeparatorum of good things which are prepared by Election but Christ is not only the cause of the effects of Justification but of the act of Justification for God doth forgive us for Christs sake and then see what a good friend Mr. Eyre is to the merits and satisfaction of Christ when he seemingly pleads for it as if we wronged the merits of Christ by suspending the benefit untill faith wrought by himself as the effect of his death and he wholly denieth it as to the act of Justification Twelfthly He saith that Justification is by Faith evidentially and Faith is from Justification causally Mr. Eyre p. 79. and he seeth no absurdity in it p. 79. which is to place the Cart before the Horse and as preposterous as to wear his Shoes upon his head and his Hat upon his feet That Faith may in a sense evidence Justification I deny not but that it is the effect of Justification is as good sense as that the daughter brought forth the mother Justification may be an effect of Faith and so the Scripture maketh it but not a cause of Faith For it is neither the efficient nor material nor formall nor final therefore it is no cause for all causes are reducible to these four Heads 1. It is not the efficient principall cause of Faith I hope he will not rob Gods free grace and the Holy Spirit of his Honour as he doth Christ of his merit of being the sole efficient cause of faith Faith it is the gift of God and the effect of the Spirit which worketh faith by the hearing of the Word it is a known rule Positâ causâ proximâ ponitur effectus and if the act of Justification should be the cause of Faith then according to him being justified from eternity we must be Believers from eternity but how contrary this is to sense reason and experience I need not speak and no man did ever yet dreame much lesse speak of Justification being the efficient cause of Faith 2. It is not the formall cause of Faith for the formal cause doth ingredi compositum it is part of the substance of the thing or effect produced the formall cause is alwayes intrinsecal to the effect and concurreth to the substance and essence of it but Justification is a thing wholly extrinsecal and adventitious to the nature of Faith the formality of Faith lieth in an adherency to Christ or a recumbency upon Christ for righteousnesse not in the act of Justification 3. Justification is not the materiall cause of Faith for the same reason above named the materiall cause is that which in union with the forme maketh up a substantial compounded body but Faith is no such thing it is not a substance but a quality and hath no matter properly so called and as for the matter improperly so called it is either materia in quâ or circa quam it is either the subject or the object but Justification is not the subject or object of Faith not the subject for the subject of Faith is a Believer nor is Justification the object of Faith for in things that have matter improperly so called the subject and the object are the same the object of Justification then is a Believer the person of a Believer not his Faith 4. And lastly Justification is not the finall cause of Faith for I am not justified that I might believe but rather I believe that I might be justified and salvation is made the end of faith Gal. 2.16 1 Pet. 1.9 and not faith the end of my salvation and thus it appeareth that Faith is not from Justification causally Thirteenthly He saith pag. 83. that he doth not presse every man to believe that he is justified Mr Eyre p. 83. but to believe there is a sufficiency in Christ for his Justification and to rely upon him and him alone for this benefit but how contrary this is to his own principles let the Reader judge for he constantly affirmeth that the Elect are justified from eternity and from the death of Christ antecedently to Faith and faith doth not instrumentally apply Christs righteousness unto Justification but Faith doth only evidence Justification to the conscience Surely when you presse men to believe you presse them to believe they are already justified and not to rely on him for this benefit for if they be justified already what need have they to rely upon him by faith for it they may according to you rely upon him for the evidencing of this
to their consciences but not for the benefit which they had in Christ before they were borne And what diminution is it of the grace of Christ if they were justified from the time of Christs death to tell them there is a sufficiency in the death of Christ for Justification when according to you there is an efficiency in the death of Christ forasmuch as they were not virtually only but actually and formally as you affirme p. 63. justified at his death Nor will it help you to say you speak there of the non-elect for we are bound to presse all men to believe as you there acknowledge and it is not known who are Elect neither to the Minister nor to the people therefore in pressing the Elect to believe a sufficiency you extenuate the merit of Christs death if they were actually justified as you affirme And there is the same ground of Faith to all the ability of Christ to save and Gods indefinite offer of salvation to whomsoever the Gospel is preached Fourteenthly He affirmeth Faith if it evidences our Justification is a signe is a dark and unsatisfying evidence as other works of Sanctification are 1 John 3.14 where he contradicteth the Apostle who saith By this we know that we are passed from death to life because we love the Brethren not we hope not we conjecture but we know it is a sure and stedfast signe Little children let no man deceive you 1 John 3.7 saith John he that doth righteousnesse is righteous is thereby viz. by his doing righteousnesse declared to be a righteous person Rom. 8.1 and in Rom. 8.1 he saith There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus and he givesh this as a signe Rom. 8.13 Who are in Christ who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit doth the Holy Ghost by Paul give us a dark unsatisfying evidence of our being in Christ What is more frequent then this he that is in Christ is a new Creature they that mortifie the deeds of the body shall live Gal 5.24 They that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof are all these dark and unsatisfying evidences then the Apostle did not well to propound them as satisfying evidences of the persons that are in Christ and shall be saved but we had rather suspect Mr. Eyre's opinion then question the Apostles judgement or unfaithfulness to propound dark and unsatisfying evidences of Justification 2. He saith that nothing that followes Faith is so apt to evidence or prove Justification as Faith because it is the first of all inherent graces but I take this for an errour and that works are every way as declarative of Justification if not more is an apparent truth For first if we speak of evidencing Justification to others it is more for saith the Apostle Thou hast faith shew me thy faith without thy works and I will shew thee my faith by my works James 2.18 And Abraham was in this sense justified by his works If any man shall say he is a justified person Vers 2â— 1 John 1.6 James 2.20 and yet liveth in the practice of any known sin I shall be bold to tell him he is a liar and the truth is not in him and works of Sanctification are no lesse declarative of Justification in evidencing it to the conscience then Faith For how shall I know my saith is a true faith an unfeigned faith and peculiar to the Elect but by the effect of a true Faith the works of Sanctification therefore if the truth of my faith be evidenced by my works then the truth of my justification is no lesse evidenced to my conscience by works then by faith nor is his reason of any worth because it is the first of all inherent graces this may prove it to have an excellency in that respect above other graces but that it hath for this reason an eminency above other graces in evidencing Justification is a lame consequence of which Master Eyre's Book is too full Fifteenthly He affirmerh that we should not be justified freely by grace if any condition were required of us in order to our Justification I take this also for a manifest errour if it be understood aright of an Evangelical condition ordained and wrought by God for the applying of Christs righteousnesse to Justification Indeed if you take a condition in a strict sense for a condition performed by us without the help of grace meriting and obliging God to give us the righteousnesse of Christ in such a sense it is true it is inconsistent with grace but such an Evangelical condition wrought by the grace of Christ without which we are not justified salvation is no lesse of grace though it be by faith as the Apostle speaketh Ye are saved by grace through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God where the Apostle speaketh of the grace of faith Eph. 2.8 and saith we are saved by it and yet he saith We are saved by grace because it is Gods gift Sixteenthly He saith pag. 99. that all the blessings of the Covenant of Grace are given us freely Pag 99. and not upon conditions performed by us viz. by our own strength yet God hath his order method in the bestowing of them c. If all the blessings of the Covenant be alike absolutely and freely given and alike merited by Christ and yet God may for order and methods sake deferre some blessings of the Covenant without wrong to Christs merits and satisfaction why is it any wrong to Christs death if Justification merited by Christ be suspended untill it be fitly applied by faith that God may not justifie a person under the reigne and power of sinne which is not agreeable to his Holinesse and Justice Seventeenthly In his 103. pag. he is guilty of a double error First â—ag 103. in making God to impute sin to men before there was any Law to offend or any breach of that Law committed by man And secondly in * Sin is apparently the cause onely of condemnation but not of Gods purpose Dr. Twisse Exam. Mr. Cot. p. 54. confounding Gods hatred of Justice with his negative act of non-election or preterition which ought to be distinguished He saith Though men will not impute sin or charge it where there is no Law to convince them of it yet it followes not but God did impute sin to men before there was any Law promulged or before the sin was actually committed for what is Gods hating of a person but his imputing of sin or his will to punish him for his sin Now the Lord hated all that perish before the Law was given To which I answer that Gods preterition or non-election though it be justly called a hatred negatively yet this was an act of Sovereignty and not of Justice nor is this hatred an imputing of their sin nor was their sin foreseen the cause *
did not intend a direct Series and order of the causes of salvation in this place from whence then it may be concluded those that are uncalled are unjustified so are the Elect Jewes Therefore A third reason is because they who are alienated from God they are not reconciled and by consequence not justified So are the Elect Jewes yet uncalled Therefore c. As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the Election they are beloved for the Fathers sake that is as * De Judaeorum gente in genere disserit qui quòd Evangelium idest quatenus Evangelium non admittunc nempe in praesenti conditiâ—ne sunt Deâ— exosi c. Beza saith upon the place Quatenus Evangelium non admittunt sunt Deo exosi quod ad Electionem attinet c. That is as they refuse the Gospel they are enemies or hateful to God in the present condition for your sakes which is to be understood that God so ordered it for the Gentiles good that upon their rejection they might be called but as concerning the Election they are beloved for the promises God made to their forefathers but as to their present condition they are hatefull to God therefore unjustified Eleventhly That that maketh the witnesse of the Spirit to be false cannot be true But to make unbelievers though Elect persons the subjects of Justification doth this Therefore c. The assumption only needeth proof Rom. 8.15 yet it is evident because the Spirit doth witnesse to the Elect unregenerate that they are in a state of bondage whence that Spirit is called the Spirit of bondage but in this witnesse the Spirit is a Spirit of truth therefore the Elect unregenerated are not justified CHAP. VIII Shewing that we are justified by faith and that when the Scriptures speak of Justification by Faith it doth not understand it only declaratively but really in the sight of God nor objectively excluding the act and the instrumentality of Faith is proved HEre also for a right understanding of the matter in hand I shall premise First That we are not justified by faith in the sense of the Papists as if it did justifie us per modum causae efficientâ—â— morâ—â—oriae as a proper efficient and meritoriour câ—â—â—e which by its own worth or dignity deserves to obtaine Justification so Bellarmine saith Bellar De Justific l. 1. c. 17. it doth justifie impetrando promorendo inchoando justificationem Nor Secondly Do we say that faith justifies in an Arminian sense as if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere the act of believing were imputed to us for righteousnesse or that Faith in the Covenant of Grace standeth instead of that obedience we owe to the Moral Law so as that our imperfect faith is for Christs sake accepted for perfect â—ighteousnesse Thirdly Faith doth not justifie us as the matter of our righteousnesse as a grace or a work or an act or a habit but the matter of our Justification is Christs righteousnesse and obedience Fourthly Faith is not to be taken objectively only that is for Christ as Mr. Eyre interprets it though it be willingly acknowledged that we are justified by no other righteousnesse then the righteousnese of Christ But Fifthly I take Faith subjectively and properly for the grace of Faith and that act of it whereby as a hand it layeth hold upon Christ for Justification and so it is to be taken with connotation to its object That if you ask for what I am justified I say the only righteousnesse of Christ imputed if you ask by what I am justified I answer by Faith as an hand to put on Christ as an instrument appointed by God to apply Christ so that Faith is not the matter of my righteousnesse but answereth in my participation of the righteousnesse in Christ to that which is the ground of my being partaker in Adams sin Sixthly This grace of Faith is the free gift of God not the birth or spawn of free will but the effect of Election and a fruit of Christs death Seventhly When the Scripture saith We are justified by faith it is to be taken for this grace of Faith relatively considered as to its object and by applying Christs righteousnesse a Believer is justified really in the sight of God by a change of his estate from death to life so that it doth not only declaratively evidence Justification to the conscience but instrumentally it justifieth us so as that I must be justified by it though I am not justified for it These things premised I shall now prove it It were needlesse to mention the Scriptures that expressely say we are justified by faith it being acknowledged that the Scripture clearly speaketh so but only the difference is how this is to be taken whether properly metonymically or both to which last I incline in the sense explained So that neither Christ alone nor Faith alone do justifie but that they are social causes though not co-ordinate and ejusdem generis of the same kinde or worth but Christ is a morall meritorious cause Faith the instrumental working only virtute agentis principalis by the power order constitution of the principal agent to the production of an effect far above its own native-worth or power Argument the first against declarative Justification The matter in controversie between Paul and the Justiciaries in his time was not by what we come to the knowledge of our Justification but by what means we are justified it is of farre greater concernment to be justified then to know his Justification he said we were justified by faith they by the Law whence I reason If faith taken subjectively for the grace of faith do only evidence Justification then we are no more justified by faith then by works But the Apostle ascribeth more to faith then to works Therefore faith doth more then evidence Justification The consequence is evident because works may evidence Justification nay works are of a more declarative evidencing nature then faith Hence the truth of faith is evidenced by works not only to others but to our selves and that works evidence this Justification of a sinner is apparent Rom. 8.1 Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit By this we know that we are passed c. 1 John 3.14 Now the Assumption I confirme thus that the Apostle attributes more to faith then to works because the Scripture no where saith we are justified by works in his blood but it saith we are justified by faith in his blood And when the Apostle speaketh of Justification by faith he meaneth of a Justification before God as in that third to the Romanes he concludeth by a sound argument that we are justified in the sight of God and not before conscience Thus if all have sinned and are come short of the glory of God and so are inherently wicked then we are
not justified by what we can do but we are all thus guilty before God therefore in his sight shall no flesh living be justified He speaketh there a Justification in foro Dei in the sight of God 2. If faith do only declare that we are justified then Paul did not say true in denying that by the works of the Law or holinesse we are justified for if he spake of a declarative Justification he had no reason to deny that we are justified by the works of obedience done to the Law for works of Sanctification do evidence this 1 John 2.3 4. 2 Cor. 5.17 1 John 3.14 1 John 3.24 Rom. 8.13 14. 3. If when the Scripture saith we are justified by faith be meant only we are declaratively justified by faith then we may as well say we are elected by faith as justified by faith because faith will as truly evidence Election as Justification hence we are commanded to make our Calling and Election sure 2 Pet. 1.10 but the Scripture saith not we are Elected by faith or through faith but chosen unto saith therefore faith hath an influence into Justification though not into Election and something more is intended then a declarative Justification 4. Then Faith is not a believing on Christ for pardon but a believing on Christ because I am pardoned and if so then an Axiom or Proposition according to Mr. Eyre is the object of justifying faith contrary to all the * Actus credentis non terminatur ad axioma sed ad rem fatentibus Scholasticorum clarissimis Amesii Medul Theol. l. 2. c. 5 24. Orthodox who make Christ or the mercy of God in Christ the object of Faith 5. Then Faith may be necessary to Consolation but it is not necessary to Salvation contrary to the Scripture which saith that salvation is the end of Faith and we believe unto the saving of our soules 6. This inverteth the order of the Gospel for that commandeth us to believe that we may be justified this saith we are already justified therefore we must believe The Scripture saith We are justified by faith This opinion as Mr. Woodbridge observeth maketh us to be faithed by Justification 7. Then it is not lawful to pray for pardon of sin but for assurance the vanity of this is before discovered But Mr. Eyre will object that when the Scripture saith We are justified by faith the meaning is by Christ taking faith objectively and exclusively To which I answer that we deny not faith to be taken objectively if you speak of the matter of our righteousnesse but that therefore faith is excluded and that the object justifie without the act I deny and prove thus First It conduceth much to the beliefe of this truth that faith is to be taken subjectively with connotation to its object or that faith subjectively taken is not excluded from Justification because the letter of the Scripture expressely in many places affirmeth that we are justified by faith Secondly I conceive the matter in controversie between Paul and the Justiciaries was not only precisely and abstractively considered what is the matter of our righteousnesse that God requires for our Justification for then his direct answer had been the righ eousnesse of Christ excluding faith for faith is in no sense the matter of our righteousnesse for which we are justified for then faith and works had not been opposed and we were then justified by works but I conceive the question was what was the matter of this righteousnesse and how is this ours as app areth by his answer Now if the righteousnesse of Christ be the matter of Justification and is made ours by imputation antecedently to faith the Apostle did impertinently adde faith in the answer to the questions that we are justified by faith in Christ if that be excluded from applying Christs righteousnesse for he is not speaking here of a declarative Justification what shall evidence it to my conscience and give me knowledge of it but what justifieth me and seeing it is something without done for me and imputed how is it mine not how is it known to be mine Therefore faith is not exclusively taken Thirdly If when it is said we are justified by faith in Christ the object is understood by the act excluding the act then why is it that in most places where Justification is spoken of that the object and the act are both expressed if by the object and act the same thing be intended Fourthly It is not probable that the Apostle in such a weighty controversie wherein he did desire to speak clearly and had most reason to speak clearly rather then elegantly and obscurely should take the act for the object if the act had no influence into Justification neither as the matter of Justification nor the instrument to apply it for danger might arise and is given by such an expression to ascribe something to faith in the point of Justification if his intent were to exclude it therefore he intended not to exclude it hence we justly ascribe instrumentality unto faith in applying Christs righteousnesse to Justification Fifthly If Abrahams faith by which he was justified was subjectively taken for the grace of faith yet relatively considered to its object then our faith that are the children of Abraham is so taken in the point of Justification this inference shineth clearly like the Sun at noon-day But Abrahams faith was subjectively taken with relation to its object Therefore The assumption is proved from Rom. 4.3 Rom. 4.3 For first besides the letter where it is said that it was imputed to him for righteousnesse that is his faith believing on God so that faith is described vers 17. in many excellent acts of that faith ne ther of which can in propriety of speech be applied to Christs righteousnesse and why the Apostle should impertinently break out into many expressions in the commendation of his faith as a grace when he is treating of the point of Justification and stirre up us to the imitation of the like faith telling us that it was written for our sakes that it was imputed to him for righteousness and that our faith believing on God that raised our Lord Jesus from the dead shall be imputed to us for righteousnesse if we so believe if faith hath no hand in Justification to apply Christs righteousnesse to that end I can no way rationally imagine Sixthly Nor can I see any supereminent excellency in that grace above all other as the Scripture expresseth and Divines acknowledge if its noblest effect of Justification be denied but as works of Sanctification do as evidently declare Justification as Faith as I have shewed so the grace of love farre excelleth it in other respects Therefore is it not exclusively taken in the point of Justification Seventhly Besides in Rom. 4.5 it is said That to him that believeth his faith is imputed for righteousnesse where something belonging to the Believer is called his to wit the act of
his person are removed for the merit of Christ but then you fraudulently withold the latter part of the sentence which makes against you as he did that cited Scripture to Christ but not by vertue of that signal promise of the Gospel He that believeth shall be saved for the effects of Gods anger against the sins of the Elect are not removed by vertue of that promise till he actually believe for hence the Elect have no consolation till faith Now if you say he meant our Justification was not evidenced to our consciences till faith and that is all he meanes Ruth Apol. Exercit. p. 44. Hear what he saith Pag. 44. Dicent ergo Arminiani nos hîc Justificationem sumere pro sensu notitia Justificationis remissionis ideòque homines fide Justificantur idem valet ac homines tum demum Justificantur quandò credunt hoc est sentiunt se justificari cum anted essent justificati Nugae tricae Siculae Nam justificari plus est quà m sentire se justificari Nam 1. Est actus Dei absolventis terminati in conscientiam hominis citati tracti ad tribunale tremendi Judicis qui actus ante hoc instans non terminabatur in conscientiam 2. Deus hoc actu certum facit conscientiae citati innitenti fiducialiter in Christum jam etiam in Christo plenam expiationem omnium peccatorum factam Ipse peccator actu fiduciali recumbit in Christum sufficientem Salvatorem credentium at verò actus Dei terminatus in nos non potest esse nudus sensus illius actûs quis sanus ità argumenta retur cui paulò magis sobrium est sinciput The Arminians will say for against them he principally dealeth in that Book and therefore opposeth an Arminian condition of faith and not ours that we take Justification for the sense and knowledge of Justification and pardon and therefore to say men are justified by faith it is as if we should say that men are then justified by faith when they believe that is when they perceive they are justified when as they were justified before These are but fables and trifles for to be justified is more then to know we are justified For First It is the act of God absolving terminated in the conscience of a sinner cited and drawn to the tribunal of a dreadfull Judge which act before this instant was not terminated upon the conscience Secondly In this act God assureth the conscience of a sinner cited to his barre fiducially trusting upon Christ that now a full expiation is made of all his sins Thirdly The sinner by a fiducial act relying upon Christ as a sufficient Saviour of Believers But the act of God terminated upon us cannot be a bare sense or knowledge of that act what sound man that hath a sober brain would so reason And immediately followeth Quamvis itaque in mente Dei peccata c. Although therefore sins were remitted in the minde of God from eternity where let the Reader observe he is speaking against the temporal and conditional decrees of Arminius making God to elect upon foreseen faith yet is not a man justified from eternity that is declared to be just in Christ in his conscience when he is cited to Gods tribunal where he taketh declared to be just for a transient act of God terminated upon the conscience fotgiving and declaring this forgivenesse and not for a bare knowledge of this by a reflex act of faith for although that act of justifying in God note an immanent and an eternal act of God yet notwithstanding that act is not the whole integral and formal reason of the Justification of a sinner of which Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians and the Scripture speaketh Formaliter enim justificare c. For for God formally to justifie is to declare actually to wit in a judiciall act that the guilty sinner trembling before his Judge now hath the benefit of eternal absolution and now first of all and never till now that the effects of his divine displacency against their sins do now cease by vertue of that divine promise wherein Christ and all his benefits and an actuall right to the Kingdom of God and the dignity of Adoption or Son-ship are promised to the Beleever Indeed he saith Pag. 43. N. 20. that faith is not the instrument of Justification actively taken as an immanent eternal act of God for no man saith he by believing doth make God to have a will not to punish sin or to have a will to love us which the Arminians plainly make and therein he saith true yet he maketh faith the instrumental cause of Justification passively taken as a declared act of God terminated upon us as that place declareth and in expresse words in pag. 37. Ruther Apol. Exer. p. 37. which Mr. Eyre in his 32. pag. of his Book when he boasted that Master Rutherford made the opinion he did oppose the chief of the Arminians and Socinians and Papists Errors could not be ignorant of for he there maketh faith the organical cause of Justification In that place he saith the Arminians would desire nothing more then this that remission of sin is not before actuall faith And that the Remonstrants in their Apology do say that nothing is more false Socinus part 4. de Salv. c. 10. then that men have sinnes remitted before they believe in which they make Socinus more plausible who saith that sinnes cannot be forgiven by an act of believing if they are remitted before they believe and Bellarmine who hath these words how is that faith true whereby I believe my sins are forgiven if while I therefore believe they are not forgiven but are to be remitted by the act of faith because every object is before his act so the Remonstrants urge to which he saith I would have these three acts distinguished 1. The act of satisfying for our sins performed by Christ and of reconciling us to God 2. The act of God the Father accepting it wherein he doth acknowledge that he is abundantly satisfied for all the sins of the Elect. 3. The act of Justification cui fides subordinatur tanquam organica causa to which faith is subordinate as an organical cause in all which Mr. Rutherford meaneth nothing but this that God did not take up a new volition but sins were intentionally pardoned from eternity Ruth Apol. page 4. which yet in his judgement is not justification for pag. 43. Homo non est justificatus ab aeterno quia homo non est ab aeterno homini credenti non sunt remissa peccata ab aeterno qumiam non estab aeterno nam justificatio remissio hoc sensu-non sunt termini diminuentes A man is not justified from eternity because a man is not from eternity sins are not remitted to a Believer from eternity because he is not from eternity and Justification and Remission passively taken are not termini
Calvin is in expresse termes for us against you and I will manifest in a few passages Calvin ad Concil Triden Sess 6. ad Can. 9 Calvin Insti l. 3. c. 11. N. 7. Hominem solâ fide justificari quum dicimus fidem non fingimus charitate vacuam sed ipsam solam justificationis causam esse intelligimus and so he saith We gather we do not take from Christ the power of justifying when we teach that he is first received by faith but yet I doe not admit of the crooked figures of this Sophistor meaning Osiander when he saith that Faith is Christ where let the Reader observe that Mr. Eyre agreeth with Osiander in interpreting faith to be Christ and it is the high way to Familisme and to think with Osiander that the essential righteousnesse of Christ is ours and withall how Calvin disliketh this interpretation As if saith he an earthen pot were a treasure because Gold is hidden in it For the reason is not unlike but that faith although it be by it self of no worthinesse or price may justifie us in bringing in Christ as a pot full of money maketh a man rich therefore I say that faith which is only the instrument to receive righteousnesse is unfitly mingled with Christ which is the material cause and both Author and Minister of so great a benefit And again Quo enim modo vera fides justificat Calvins Inst l. 3. c. 17. N. 11. nisi dum nos Christo conglutinat ut unum cum illo facti participatione ejus fruamur So again However we be redeemed of Christ yet till we be by the calling of the Father graffed into the communion of him we are both heires of darknesse and death and the enemies of God 1 Cor. 6.11 for Paul teacheth that we are not cleansed by the blood of Christ untill the Holy Ghost worketh that cleansing in us 1 Pet. 1.2 which same thing Peter minding to teach declareth that the sanctifying of the Spirit availeth unto obedience and be sprinkling of the blood of Christ if we be by the Spirit sprinkled unto cleansing by the blood of Christ let us not think that before such watering we be any other then a sinner is without Christ Let this therefore remain certain that the beginning of our salvation is as it were a certain resurrection from death te life because when for Christs sake it is given to us to believe in him then we first begin to passe from death to life Vnder this sort are comprehended they which have in the division above been noted for the second and third sort of men for the uncleannesse of conscience proveth that both of them are not yet regenerate by the Spirit of God And again where there is no regeneration in them Calvins â— Inst 3. Book 14. c. N. 6 7. this proveth the want of Faith whereby appeareth that they are not yet reconciled to God nor yet justified in his sight for as much as these things are not attained to but by faith The length of the Testimony hath made me omit the Latine it is endlesse to repeat more I conceive Calvine sufficiently vindicated by what is already cited Your next Author is * Zanchy lib. 50. de Natura Dei c. 2. p. 539 Zanchy who though in the words cited something favoureth your opinion yet he meaneth only that we were virtually justified in Christ and in other places is most expressely against you And to avoid prolixity I will give his Testimony only in English The fourth benefit saith he is Justification that is the forgivenesse of our sins and the imputation of Christs righteousness for this followeth faith So also he saith in a twofold sense it may be said and understood that a man is justified by faith instrumentally and formally and in both senses we are justified by faith alone in the first sense because by this as an instrument fitted for this matter we receive the grace of God and righteousnesse of Christ in the latter sense as by the only obedience and righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith we are formally justified as the faith apprehending is taken for the thing apprehended So again * Zanch. Loc. Com. Theol. Epist ad Eph. Loc. 2. p. 83. there are three things required to this that we be partakers of salvation and without which we cannot be saved First As the fountain of all benefits the grace of God his eternal favour love and mercy to us Secondly The other is the complement or fulfilling of the promises and figures of the Old Testament concerning our redemption by blood and the offering up of a Lamb without spot whereby sins might be expiated The third benefit necessary to salvation and sine * Zanch. de tribus Elâ— lib. 5. pag. 195 196. quo reliqua duo nobis inania inutilia sunt est vera Dei cognitio sive fides nam sine fide est impossibile placere Deo Without which the other two are vaine and unprofitable is the true knowledge of God or faith without which it is impossible to please God * Zanch. Tom. 8. de justisi fidei loc undecim p. 781. Once more the wrath of God saith he resteth upon all sinners so long as they continue to be sinners that is unsanctified persons that is his meaning therefore sin is a division between God and man it is a turning of the face of God from the sinner nor can it otherwise be seeing it is repugnant to his righteousnesse to have any fellowship with sin whence the Apostle teacheth that a man is an enemy to God untill he returne into favour through Christ whom therefore the Lord receiveth into conjunction He is said to justifie because he cannot receive into favour nor unite any man to himself but of a sinner he maketh him righteous The next Author is Chamier and it cannot be denied but he hath the words you have cited but it is no hard matter to prove that he contradicteth you and himself in other places I will instance in one Itaque semel habeto nos Legis Evangeliâ— discrimen cùm quaerimus * Itaque semel habeto nos Legis Evangelii discrimen cùm quaerimus utrumquâ— nominare câ—ntractâ illâ significatione secundùm quam Paulus opponit legâ—â—â—perum legi fidei Dâ—inde proprium verum certum discrimen conditionem operum fidei hoc â—st legem operam proponere salutem sub conditione legis perficiendae at legem fidei eâ—â—dem proponere sub conditione tantùm credendi in â—hristum nimirum ut utrinque sumatur conâ—ttio eodem sensu Cham. Panstrat Tom. 3. Lib. 15. Cap 3. Sect. 26. c. Therefore take it for once that we when we seek a difference between the Law and the Gospel do name both in that short signification according to which Paul opposeth the Law of Works to the Law of Faith therefore the condition of Works and Faith do constitute a
proper certain and true difference that is to say the Law propoundeth salvation upon condition of fulfilling the Law but the Law of faith propoundeth the same salvation under the condition of believing only in Christ to wit that on both sides a condition be taken in the same sense that is that they have the same order to their respective Covenants otherwise faith is not a condition so as to be the matter of our righteousnesse as the fulfilling of the Law is Thus you see how he maketh Faith the condition of the Covenant antecedent to salvation thereby expected As for Maccorius we yield you his Testimony but could produce if need were a hundred for one of greater name and note Your last is Dr. Ames whose testimony you might have left out because he speakeâ—h far more against you then for you in the same place for he saith that it was quasi concepta as it were conceived in the minde of God and so the like phrase is to be given to the death of Christ as it were or virtually pronounced but he doth not say it was so really and formally as if we were so justified from eternity or from the time of Christs death yea a little after which you could not be ignorant of he saith Est autem haec justificatio propter Christum non absolute consideratum Ames Medul l. 1. c. 27. s 14. quo sensu Christuâ— est causa ipsius vocationis sed propter Christum fide apprehensum quae fides vocationem sequitur tanquam effectum justitiam Christi ex quâ apprehensâ justificatio sequitur unde justitia dicitur esse ex fide Rom. 9.30.10.6 justificatio per fidem Rom. 3.28 This Justification is for Christs sake not absolutely considered in the sense wherein Christ is the cause of effectual vocation but for Christs sake apprehended by faith which faith followeth effectual vocation as the effect and the righteousnesse of Christ being apprehended Justification followeth hence it is said that righteousnesse is of faith Rom. 9.30.10.6 and Justification by faith Rom. 3.28 And in the sixteenth Section thus Neque est propriè loquendo specialis siducia Nor is it to speak properly a special trust or assurance speaking of justifying faith whereby we apptehend or know the remission of our sins and our justification Fides enim justificans praecedit justificationem ipsam ut causa suum effectum sed fides justficationem apprehendens necessariò praesupponit ac sequitur justificationem ut actus objectum suum circa quod versatur For justifying faith goeth before Justification as the cause before its effect but Faith comprehending Justification necessarily presupposeth it to go before as the act its object about which it is conversant so that faith as it is assurance followeth Justification but as it is a resting on Christ for pardon in its justifying act so it goeth before Justification as the cause goeth before the effect Thus having examined his authorities we see that if they may be impartially examined and permitted to speak their own minde they all give in evidence against the cause that he maintaines CHAP. X. Containing a vindication of such Scriptures as are brought by Mr. Woodbridge for Justification by faith and mis-interpreted by Mr. Eyre together with an answer to such Scriptures as he hath brought to defend his Errour of Justification antecedent unto faith THE first Scripture is Rom. 5.1 Therefore being justified by faith we have peace with God 1. He will have the Comma to be placed after justified as thus being justified by faith we have peace with God But first This is a reading contrary to the common acceptation of the place by all men Secondly It offereth violence to the Text for the scope of the place is to shew the efficacy of faith unto Justification as may appear by the illative particle therefore which hath not relation onely to the words immediately foregoing but to the summe and substance of the whole Chapter for the fourth Chapter containeth an Argument to prove Justification by Faith and not by the works of the Law drawn from the example of Abraham the Father of the faithful after this manner By what meanes Abraham the Father of Believers was justified By the same it behoveth his children to be justified that is all Believers but Abraham was not justified by any works neither preceding nor following his faith but by faith Therefore we must look for Justification by faith only In the third verse he confirmeth the Assumption because Abraham believed and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse that is his faith was imputed not in an Arminian sense but his faith properly taken in relation to the object and hereupon he commendeth exceedingly the faith of Abraham the grace of faith and sets it forth in many excellent properties which can no way agree to the object and then stirreth up us to an imitation of this faith telling us that it was not written for his sake only but for ours also and assureth us that our faith also shall be imputed for righteousnesse if we believe then he describeth the object of this faith God in Christ as raising Christ from the dead where he setteth forth the two main pillars of Faith Christs Death and Resurrection and this is illustrated by Gods end in both these 1. He delivered him to death for our offences that is to satisfie for our sins 2. He raised him again for our Justification to declare he was absolved from our sins and so had made full satisfaction hence then he drawes down this conclusion and shewes a new effect of faith and so a new argument Being therefore justified by faith we have peace with God as if he should say By what we have peace we are justified But by faith we have peace therefore we are justified Thirdly Neither can faith be taken here for the object excluding the act but for the grace and act of faith with relation to its object for then we shall make the Text admit of a Tautology for the meritorious cause is expressed Therefore here by faith the act must be understood for it is said Being justified by faith we have peace through our Lord Jesus there Christ the meritorious cause of Justification is expressed therefore the same thing is not understood by faith yea here saith Beza Beza in Loc. three causes are enumerated of our salvation Tres hîc enumerat causas nostrae pacis Apostolus fidem Deum Jesum Christum non coordinatas ejusdem generis sed subordinatas incipiente Apostolo à causa nobis per Dei gratiam datâ intrinsecâ instrumentali nempe fide cujus scopus objectum est Deus Pater interveniente Jesu Christi propitiatione Here saith Beza the Apostle doth enumerate three causes of our peace Faith God and Jesus Christ not coordinate causes and of the same kâ—nd but subordinate The Apostle beginning from an intrinsecal instrumental cause given us by the
grace of God to wit Faith whose scope and object is God the Father by the intervention of the propitiation of Jesus Christ A second Scripture is Gal. 2.16 We knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ even we have believed that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law where Mr. Eyre's glosse to evade the force of this Scripture is that the phrase that we may be is as much as that we may be manifested and declared and know that we are justified To this I answer that the Apostle is not speaking here of a declarative Justification but of a Justification real before God therefore when he speaketh of not being justified by the Law he meaneth not a declarative Justification and therefore when he speaks of Justification by faith he means not a declarative Justification for then the opposition is not ad idem for look in what sense he taketh it in the first member of the opposition it must be taken in the same sense in the latter member but it is nor meant of a declarative Justification in the first therefore neither in the latter For that neither was the question between the Apostle and the Justiciaries nor could the Apostle say with truth that works do not evidence Justification As for Justification in foro conscientiae it is not Justification properly but the knowledge and assurance of it Justification is to be considered as an action of God for it is God that justifieth The Apostle giveth an account why he and the believing Jewes did believe in Christ for Justification because they knew that they could not be justified by the Law Now there is no way but by the Law or by faith in Christ therefore they did beleeve in Christ where Justification by the faith of Christ is made the finall cause of their believing Now if they did therefore beleeve that they might be justified how can that that was the end of their beleeving evidence that they were justâ—fied already before they did believe and here let the Reader observe that both the act and object is expressed and if as Mr. Eyre ordinarily understands the object by the act why are both expressed Therefore the grace of Faith relatively considered as apprehending Christs righteousnesse is that by which we are justified The third Scripture being Rom. 8.30 I have already vindicated in my tenth Argument against eternall Justification A fourth place which he hath abused is Rom. 4 22. where it is said that it shall be imputed to us if we beleeve that is faith in Christ shall be imputed to us for righteousnesse as it was to Abraham for there is but one way whereby both he and we are justified Mr. Eyre's answer is That this particle if is not conditional but declarative and so he taketh the meaning to be this Hereby we may know and be assured that Christs righteousnesse is imputed to us if we beleeve where observe that he wrongeth the scope of the Apostle which is to encourage us to beleeve as did Abraham from the good effect of it for hereby righteousnesse shall be imputed to us if we beleeve he speaketh of a future mercy to be obtained and Mr. Eyre telleth us of an assurance that we shall have that it was done already where he changeth the time past for the time present and so overthroweth the Apostles scope and putteth a declarative sense upon the words for a conditional This is not to interpret Scripture but to suborn the Spirit to serve his own turne And hence I argue against him If the imputation of righteousnesse be a thing that is not already but shall be imputed if they beleeve then the particle if is not declarative but conditional But the imputation of righteousness is not a thing then done but was to be done Therefore And for this the words are plaine it shall be imputed if we believe A fifth Scripture is Acts 10.43 To him give all the Prophets witnesse that through his Name whosoever believe shall receive the remission of sins He saith it is not said by believing we obtain remission of sins and a little after we obtain remission by Christ but we receive it by faith I answer There is an ambiguity in the word obtain if by it he understand we do not merit purchase forgivenesse we grant it for whoever made the instrumental the meritorious cause of forgivenesse of sins but if by it he understand a receiving the remission of our sins through Christ which then and never till then was received we say thus forgivenesse is obtained by faith as a cause to apply Christs righteousnesse for Justification nor is this receiving a receiving of the knowledge of remission as a thing before done and the knowledge of it only now obtained by faith for it is said that by faith we receive remission not the knowledge of remission all the Prophets testifie this we receive remission not the sense of the remission of sinnes Therefore Mr. Eyre's interpretation is contrary to all the Prophets witnesse Besides were we justified from eternity as Mr. Eyre wil have it when by Gods eternal act this remission was given it had been an injury to God Besides an improper speech to say All that beleeve shall receive remission They should have said ye were remitted before if ye beleeve ye shall know it The sixâ—h Scripture is Acts 13.39 By him all that believe shall be justified from all things from which they could not c. He saith that this sheweth the excellency of the Gospel above the Law and that here is nothing at all of the time of Justification though he affirme that he that believeth is justified yet it followeth not the Elect are not justified before faith much lesse that a man is justified by the gracious act or habit of faith I answer let it be granted he commend the Gospel-sacrifice for sin above the sacrifices of the Law yet he saith that by obtaining the Law they could not be justified and what they could not have by the Law or any sacrifice therein offeted that may be obtained by Christ through faith where if his purpose were to exclude faith from Justification he might have said only by him we are justified from all this from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses but he describeth the persons and the condition expressely and if Believers only are justified then unbelievers are not and faith is necessary Therefore though we be not justified by it as the matter of our righteousnesse yet as the instrument to apply it and the Apostles limiting this to Believers were vaine if unbelievers also were the subjects of it A seventh Scripture to which he hath done violence is 2 Cor. 5.21 where Christ is said to be made sin for us that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him where this is made the finall cause why
premise that we understand not by qualifying us for Justification any moral disposing and qualifying us sensu pontificio in the Papists sense inchoating our Justification as if we were to be justified by something inherent in us but by qualifying we mean nothing but this that according to the tenour of the Gospel and New Covenant it makes us subjects capable of the act of Justification for as much as the condition required is now fulfilled and as faith is Gods gift so it is a passive condition as it is our act so it is an active instrument not elicited by the power of free will but by assistance of special grace whereby we apprehend Christs righteousnesse for Justification and in this sense we are justified by faith according to the Scriptures Now let us consider his Arguments First That Interpretation of the phrase which gives no more to faith in the businesse of our Justification then to other works of Sanctification cannot be true because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith in way of opposition to other workes of Sanctification but to interpret Faith meerly thus that it is a condition to qualifie us for Justification gives no more to Faith then to other works of Sanctification We shall reverence the Major and let it go but must commit his Minor to the Marshalsie as a Rebel against reason For though we make Faith a condition and a passive condition in the sense explained yet this hindereth not but that it may be an instrumental cause of Justification and in this sense we give more to faith then to other works of Sanctification Besides we make not as he affirme works necessary antecedents to Justification necessary antecedents to Salvation we do but not unto Justification For we acknowledge that of August to be true opera non precedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum And now I shall retort this Argument upon himself That Interpretation of the phrase which giveth no more to faith in the businesse of Justification then to other works of Sanctification cannot be true because the Scripture doth peculiarly attribute our Justification unto Faith in a way of opposition to other works of Sanctification but to interpret Faith subjectively taken thus that it justifieth us only because it evidenceth our Justification is to attribute no more to faith then to other works of Sanctification Ergo. If he answer that faith subjectively taken for the grace of faith is not opposed to works because it is a work I answer 1. If it be a work yet it is the work of God and not ours 2. It justifieth not as a work but as an instrument to apply Christs righteousnesse Nay 3. I see not but the opposition stand as strongly as if he took faith objectively for Christs righteousnesse or obedience for certainly the matter of our Justification is the obedience of Christ to the Law and so we are justified by works properly in the person of another Secondly That Interpretation which gives no more to faith then to works of nature such as are found in natural unregenerate men is not true but to interpret faith a necessary antecedent of our Justification gives no more to faith then to works of nature I deny the Minor for conditio sine quà non a condition whithout which a thing is not done may be a necessary condition yet it is not so necessary as that is which is a cause by which the thing is done the eye-lids must be opened as a necessary antecedent unto sight But will you therefore say it is as equally necessary as the eye it self so it is in the present case sight of sin sorrow for it are necessarily required in the subject where God will work faith but it followeth not that they are as equally necessary and have as much influence into Justification as Faith The third Argument is this That by which we are justified is the proper efficient meritorious cause of our Justification but Faith considered as a passive condition is not a proper efficient cause of Justification I answer by distinguishing upon the word by That by which we are justified as the material cause of our Justification or the matter for which we are justified is the meritorious proper efficient cause of Justification and in this sense we are not justified by faith 2. It may be taken for the instrument by which that righteousnesse for which we are justified is apprehended and applied and in this sense we are justified by faith and taking it in this latter sense I deny the Major Nor is faith only the instrumental cause of Justification in foro conscientiae as a little after you affirme though it be taken properly for the act of believing but in foro Dei nor a bare condition without which but a condition by which by vertue of Gods Covenant it is obtained and therfore I acknowledg a true causality in faith unto Justification Fourthly That which maketh us concurrent causes in the formall act of Justification with God and Christ because our Justification in respect of efficiency is attributed to them is not true but to make faith morally disposing us to Justification maketh us concurrent causes with God and Christ in our Justification I answer 1. He attributeth more to us then we affirme we say not that faith doth moraly dispose us to Justification as he taketh it in the Argument it is no meritorious moving cause of Justification nor is all moral disposition a morall causality 2. The Major is not universally true for Faith is a social cause but not a co-ordinate cause of Justification Besides what Faith doth it doth it virtute agentis principalis and by vertue of Gods Covenant not as our act nor by any inherent worth in it self 1. Nor doth it follow from hence that if any condition be required in order to our Justification then it is not free for the very condition is freely given nor is it left to be performed by the power of our free-will this would hinder the freenesse of Justification 2. It is not denied that we are concurrent causes with the merits of Christ but Christ and Faith are not causes ejusdem generis for Christs righteousnesse is that for which we are justified Faith is only that whereby this righteousnesse is received and applied unto Justification Fifthly That Interpretation which makes Works going before Justification not only not sinful but acceptable to God and praeparatory to the grace of Justification is not according to the minde of the Holy Ghost but to interpret Justification by faith that faith is a condition which doth qualifie us for Justification necessarily supposeth a work or works which have not the nature of sin but are acceptable to God and preparatory to grace The Major we shall let passe as innocent the Minor hath guilt and weaknesse more then enough to be imputed to it 1. We say Faith doth not us qualifie as an inherent disposition preparing us for a
non-imputing them to us it was a paying the ransome for us a legal translation of the eternal punishment upon Christ a laying help upon one that was mighty but this was not nor is ever called in Scripture Justification here is no formal imputation of any righteousnesse to us who are not yet borne much lesse cited before a Tribunal and absolved from the guilt of sinne Besides 't is not the charging of a surety with the debt bue the discharging of him rather that carries the force of an Argument to prove our discharge but although Christ in his Resurrection was legally discharged as a publik person and all that he did represent fundamentally meritoriously and causally yet not personally and formally which is necessary to Justification Thus have I answered his Arguments which he hath brought to prove the antecedency of Justification to Faith there remaineth yet one Argument and Objection behinde with which I shall put an end to this discourse leaving that which relateth to the Covenant to Mr. Woodbridge to whom it peculiarly belongeth from whom I doubt not but the world will receive a satisfactory answer The Argument yet unanswered is this If a man have the Spirit of God given him before he beleeve then he must needs be justified before he doth beleeve because then he is in Covenant before he beleeveth and he that is in Covenant is justified To this I answer First by Concession willingly acknowledging faith to be the Spirits work and that no man can beleeve without the help of the Spirit working Faith Secondly I deny the Consequence that although the Spirit worketh Faith before we can beleeve yet doth it not follow that a man is justified before beleeving And the reason of the Consequence I deny also it followeth not that he is in Covenant before beleeving for there is no distance of time between the giving of the Spirit our beleeving and being justified and in Covenant or being passed from the state of death into a state of salvation because there is a synchronisme in these in respect of time they being altogether as soone as ever there is fire there is heat so as soone as the Spirit is given Faith is wrought and the person justified and in Covenant and sanctified at the same time for God is able to act in instanti in a moment the Spirit is then said to be given to us when he doth manifest his Divine presence by working somthing in us peculiar to the elect for though those that shall perish may be enlightened and taste of the powers of the world to come and may be said to be partakers of the holy Ghost yet properly none receive the Spirit but the Elect and what others have is not a true saving work now because no work before Faith is truly saving and have a necessary connexion with salvation therefore the Spirit is not received before Faith and so they are simultanea all together the Spirit Faith and Justification and being in Covenant and therefore though there may be a precedency of nature in this gift of the Spirit before Faith yet followeth it not that we are justified and in Covenant before Faith but at this very instant is the beleever taken into Covenant and justified and thus I willingly acknowledge the first grace is absolutely given to wit effectual vocation or Faith by which the soul is brought into an estate of Justification and Faith is made the condition though wrought by God of our Justification So that our being in Covenant and justified follow Faith in order of nature which is contrary to that which Master Eyre hath all along contended for that a man is justified from eternity or from the time of Christs death antecedently to our birth and faith and that the unregenerate so remaining if elected are justified in that estate which opinion if it be received how it should not destroy the vitals of Religion is past my understanding to imagine Having therefore had the glory of God the vindication of this blessed truth the salvation of the souls of Gods Elect the preserving them from Errour that are yet free from the infection of it the reducing those that are gone astray before mine eyes and having with earnest prayers unto God sought for guidance herein I undertook this task and through his grace have finished it and I trust I have not I am sure I have not willingly departed from the truth and if in any thing I have written I have erred from the truth as humanum est errare upon the first discovery of it I shall through the grace of Christ become a thankful Proselyte in the meane time I commend the Christian Reader to the grace of God in Christ And the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the Father of glory tread down Satan under our feet establish and settle us in the truth and give us to receive it in the love of it and grant to us the Spirit of wisdome and revelation in the knowledge of him that the eyes of our understandings may be enlightened that we may know what is the hope of his calling and what is the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the Saints and by the exceding greatnesse of his power work Faith in the hearts of his Elect where it is yet wanting according to the working of his mighty power and fulfil that which is lacking in our faith with power and so keep us by his mighty power through faith unto this salvation which is ready to be revealed at the second coming of Christ Amen A Postscript of the Authour by way of advertisement to the Reader WHereas it is said pag. 238 that it is not denied that we are concurrent causes with the merits of Christ in the work of Justification least Mr. Eyte in particular or any other should through wilfulnesse or weaknesse mistake the minde of the Authour he is desired not to dismember the sentence but to take it as it is there explained And I further declare that I understand by it no more but that faith is a concomitant social cause with Christ in the work of Justification but not a co-ordinate or meritorious cause of the same kinde but a subordinate instrument appointed by God for the receiving and applying of Christs righteousnesse unto Justification and that this faith is Gods Almighty work and free gife without which no man shall ever have benefit by Christs righteousnesse and because it is our act though it be Gods gift for it is we that believe and not God in this sense alone it is said that we are concurrent causes with Christ not that we are justified by faith as our act but as it is an organical instrument to apply Christs righteousnesse for this end and this I conceive is the unanimous opinion of all the Orthodox FINIS
faile of nor be led aside with the errour of the wicked fall from your own stedfastnesse but may grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Christ who is our hope shall be the prayer of him who is Your remembrancer at the throne of grace and your soules-servant in the worke of Christ THOMAS WARREN TO THE Christian Reader Courteous Reader IN this intervall of church discipline which is no small dammage to the church and a manifest injury to the Kingly office of Iesus Christ every bold adversary to the truth taketh liberty to question and denie the fundamentall articles of religion and being equally infranchized with the Orthodox in the liberty of the presse and armed with this advantage that the nature of man is more prone to embrace errour then truth and the Athenian itch having infecting the mindes of most men that they spend their time in nothing else but to relate or heare some new thing hence the world is at once infected with dangerous heresies and mens judgements are leavened with an antipathy against the knowne and received truths of Christ hinc illae lachrimae But to see Mr. Eyre and men of some name for learning walking in the throng of seducers and to list themselves among the common adversaries to religion and to become Satans decoyes to ensnare the simple and leade them from the simplicity of the gospel to see such men ascend the chair and turne professors and defenders of errour yea even panders to the flesh it is time for the lords servants to stand up as Champions for the truth But alas that complaint of Hierome concerning the seducers of his time may well be taken up Ardentius ab illis defenditur haeresis quà m à nostris oppugnatur Heresie is more zealously defended by them then opposed by us I confesse I prize the vnity of brethren and next to the peace of a good conscience the Churches peace provided that peace and truth may live together but where truth must be strangled to preserve peace it is better to ransome the life of truth though it be with the losse of peace For which cause I have appeared in this controversie not so much to vindicate my self defamed by Mr. Eyre as to rescue the truth which he doth under the shew of defending the freenesse of Gods grace therefore tâ—e more dangerously seeke to destroy his errour being of such consequence that it subverteth if received the whole order of the Gospel it opposeth a maine article of religion openeth a wide doore to profanenesse And next to this my respects to some to whom my ministery may be usefull hath drawn me forth to this vindication to whom I may say as Augustin Mihi sufficit conscientia mea Aug ad fratres in cremo vobis autem necessaria est fama mea The testimony of my owne conscience that I have not in that Sermon which M. Eyre doth oppose departed from the truth had been sufficient to me but to them a vindication of my selfe and it may be necessary What Mr. Eyres intentions were to rend the Churches peace and to trouble the world with the untimely birth of this errour I cannot tell sure I am that if it were not finis opperantis yet 't is finis operis the end of the work if not of the authour to unsettle christians in the doctrine of faith It may be because he reckons himselfe to be one of the manly sort of Divines he speakes of and not being content to lie in obscurity he is willing to raise an estate of reputation by letting the world see how able he is to defend an errour There are many who as learned Vossius well observes gloriosum putant toti antiquitati bellum indicere nec flâ—ccipendunt si haeretici modo docti habeantur thinke it a glorious thing to oppose all antiquity nor doe they care to be accounted heretiques so they may have the repute of being learned And that his opinion viz. the Antedency of justification unto faith is repugnant to all orthodox antiquity is above contradiction Neither is there any one errour against which Scripture light doth more rise up in armes then this and I appeale to every intelligent reader whether it doth not run contrary to the very veine of the gospel which teacheth justification to be the effect not the cause of faith as he in terminis doth assert p. 78 79. that he seeth no absurdity to say that faith is from justification causally and justification by faith evidentially It was the complaint of Aug in his time sub laudibus naturae latent inimici gratiae but we may invert and alter the proposition and say sub laudibus gratiae latent inimici fidei enemies to faith shelter themselves under the praises of Gods free grace And herein I wonder much at Mr. Eyre that he should oppose grace and faith when he knoweth that the adversaries he opposeth hold not faith a condition of the Covenant either in an Arminian or Popish sense and that the Scripture saith that it was the purpose of God to justifie us by faith that it might be of grace Rom. 4.16 2 Ephes. 8. as the reader may see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 4 to the Rom. 16 therefore it is of faith that it might be of grace and in 2. Ephes 8. by grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God not of workes lest any man should boast I can scarcely have so much faith and charity to thinke that a man can live by faith that sets himselfe to destroy that grace of faith by which we live however 1 Eph. 18.19 â— 1 Rom. 17. 2 Hâ—b 4. 3 Eph. 17. he is a small friend to this grace which the Scripture doth so highly commend as being wrought by the same almighty power that wrought in Christ when God raised him from the dead by which the just shall live and by which Christ dwelleth in our hearts that shall deprive it of the most vitall and noble act of it viz. of vniting us to Christ and intitling us to the righteousnesse of Christ unto justification I plead not for faith so as to set the crowne upon her head which is due to Christ alone shee is content to be the friend of the bridegroom neither seeketh she to share with Christ in the honour of Salvation Faith is content and all that have it to wither in their reputation it is fit that Christ should increase and we decrease we plead not then to have faith to be a corrivall with Christ to be a sociall and coordinate cause in the justification of a sinner And yet wee cannot but give it that office which God hath assigned to it to be an instrumentall cause of justification wherein it hath the praecedency above all other graces as being the only instrument ordained of God to receive Christs righteousnesse and so not only to
that the sufferings of Christ though in themselves they be adequately proportionable to the justice of God should be accepted for us therefore God may at his pleasure appoint the manner how whether absolutely and immediately or upon a future condition For as Scotus saith well Meritum Christi tantum bonum est nobis Scotus lib. 3. dist 19. qu. vind p. 74. pro quanto acceptabatur à Deo The value of Christs merits is to be accounted to us only so farre as God accepteth it and therefore to that which Mr. Eyre and his adherents urge that satisfaction was given and accepted I answer by distinguishing upon acceptance This may be taken in a two fold sense either in respect of the surety Christ and the price paid or in respect to the sinner and the actuall application of it 1. In respect to Christ and the value of his sufferings it was a full satisfaction that God neither can having admitted Christ a surety require more at the hands of Christ nor any thing else of the sinner by way of satisfaction to his justice but he never accepted it in respect of the sinner to effect his freedome and present discharge without some act of his intervening to give him interest in this satisfaction Nor do I judge faith to be a moving cause or organical instrument either of Christs satisfaction or of Gods acceptation of it for us Faith doth not make Christs satisfaction to be meritorious Faith is not the condition of Christs acquiring pardon but of the application of pardon the dignity and worth of Christs merits and satisfaction arise from the dignity of his person nor is faith the moving cause of Gods will to accept of Christs satisfaction for us that ariseth from Gods will of purpose ordaining it for us And therefore Mr. Rutherford speaks appositely Ruth Apâ—â— p. 42. Nos credendo non efficimus vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut Deus Christi mortem pro peccatis nâ—stris acceptet neque ulla causalitas externa movere potest Dei voluntatem 4. It is of great consequence toward the clearing of this that the death of Christ doth not procure an immediate discharge to the sinner to consider that the death of Christ is not a naturall and physical cause of removing and taking away sin for then the effect must immediately follow but it is a meritorious cause which is in the number of morall causes and here the rule is not true Positâ causâ ponitur effectus for here the effect is at the liberty of the persons moved thereby and hence sometime the effects of morall causes precede the cause as for the death of Christ God pardoned the sins of such as died in the faith long before Christ was borne and sometime it followes a long time after at the agreement and liberty of the persons that are perswaded thereby to do any thing 5. Christ by his death did not absolutely purchase reconciliation and an actual discharge from the guilt of sin for any whether they believe or not believe for then faith were not necessary to salvation but at the most to consolation and finall unbelief would condemne none of those for whom Christ died but the Scripture saith He that believeth not shall be damned and Mark 16.16 John 8.24 If you believe not ye shall die in your sins and it makes faith necessary to salvation hence when the Jaylor said What must I do to be saved Acts 16 3â— 1 Pet. 1.9 Paul and Silas answered Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved And salvation is expressely said to be the end of faith when therefore we say that Christ died absolutely we must know that the word absolutely may be taken two wayes 1. As it is opposed to an antecedent condition to be brought by us by the power of our own free-will so that upon this shall depend the fruits of Christs death Or 2. Absolutely may be taken as opposed to any prerequisite condition ordained by God as a certain order and meanes to obtain the fruit of Christs death which condition is the fruit and effect of Christs death and in this latter sense the death of Christ was not an absolute purchase of reconciliation 't is true the Arminians hold that Christ hath purchased pardon for us upon condition of believing which believing they make not a fruit of Christs death but of their own free-will and thus they make Christ to open a door of hope for us but it 's possible that no man may enter in and be saved and thus by them we have only a salvability by Christ but no certainty of salvation but we affirme no such matter and say that Christ satisfied Gods justice so that God is not placabilis but placatus not appeasable but appeased and God is now reconciled and will give pardon but in that order and method himself hath appointed which is faith which faith God hath predestinated us unto that shal be saved Christ hath purchased it for us as well as remission of sins and therefore it shall infallibly be wrought that there may be an actual application of Christs death unto justification now in this sense the death of Christ is not absolute so as to exclude any condition and qualification wrought by the Spirit of Christ to apply his death Johan Cam. opus misc p. 5.32 col 2. And to this purpose learned Camero hath expressed himself A Christo satisfactio exigi non potuit nî Deus eum considerâsset ut eorum caput pro quibus satisfecit fructus ergo satisfactionis ad eos solos redire potuit qui membra forent hujus corporis ii autem sunt soli fideles credo igitur Christum prâ— me satisfecisse quia verè satisfecit sed satisfactionem illam deo novi mihi esse salutiferam quia mihi fidei meae sum consciu Neque tamen fructum satisfactionis ab ipsa satisfactione divello Christus enim pro te satisfecit sed eâ lege si tu id factum credas ut si captivum redimerem pretio numerato ìta tamen ut nî ille se redemptum agnoscat meo beneficio habeatur pro non redempto Et paulò post pag. 534. col 1. sect 4. Illud nempe est quod dixi pro nemine Christum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 satisfecisse verùm hà c lege additâ ut qui naturà sumus è mundo mundo exempti verá fide Christo inseramur That he was no Arminian is evident to all that have read him And a little after in the 2. Col. p. 534. he answereth an Objection Sed ais in omni satisfactione tria tantùm requiri 1. Vt numeretur summa quae contractum aes exaequet 2. Vt numeretur creditori 3. Vt numeretur ejus nomine qui eam debebat Id quidem verum est quoties creditor non id praecipuè spectat in satisfactione ut cujus nomine satisfactum est is beneficium
valued by the time of application it being a moral cause and not a physical or natural cause of justification but by the powerfulnesse of the impetration and the certainty of application now we grant that it hath by way of merit procured reconciliation and hence our deliverance is called redemption Rom. 3.24 which was made by the payment of a full price now the price being paid for the Elect the effect shall follow in the time appointed Gal. 3.13 Eph. 1.7 Heb. 9.12 â— Pâ—t â— 18.19 1 Cor. 6 2â— hence we grant that there shall be a certain application oâ— the benefits of Christs death to all the persons for whom it was intended though they have not actuall possession and that leads me to the last particular that Mr. Eyre layes to the charge of this Doctrine that it is disconsolatory to the souls of men in laying the weight of their salvation upon an uncertain condition of their own performing To which calumny I might returne no other answer then the Senate of Rome is reported to have given to a certain Oration made by Julian the Apostate to the dishonour of Constantine and repeated before them Ames Coro praefa ad eccles belgicas Modestiam majorem optamus Authori we wish more modesty to the Author But that I may for ever silence this objection I reply that Mr. Eyre cannot but know that the Orthodox that maintain Justification by Faith do yet utterly disclaime faith as a condition either in an Arminian or a Popish sense 1. The Arminians hold that Christ died indefinitely for all without distinction and that he died no more for Peter then for Judas and that he paid a sufficient satisfaction for all so that God may now freely remit the sins of all 2. They maintain a potestative or voluntary condition which they borrow from the Jurists whereby it being left free to their own will whether they will believe or not the effect of Christs death is rendred uncertain whether they shall be saved or not and so they affirme all to be redeemed so as that it is possible none may be saved they hold as it were a potential reconciliation which is by the act of faith to be compleated which faith they affirme not to be the effect of Christs death but of their own free will So the Remonstrants Nihil ineptius Rem Apol c. 8. p. 95. nihil vanius quà m fidem merito Christi tribuere si enim Christus meritus est fidem tum fides conditio esse non poterit They say Nothing is more foolish nothing more vain then to ascribe faith to the merit of Christ for if Christ hath merited faith then it cannot be a condition and they laugh at it as a ridiculous conceit Rem Apol. c. 9. p. 105. that God should work the condition which he prescribeth Their words are Anne conditionem quis seriò sapienter praescribet alteri sub promisso praemii poenae gravissimae comminatione qui cam in eo cui praescribit efficere vult haec actio tota ludicra vix scenâ digna est And this Mr. Eyre takes notice of as the Remonstrants opinion pag. 145. where he reciteth the same passages 2. The Papists make faith a meritorious condition which justificeth us per modum causae efficientis meritoriae as a proper efficient and meritorious cause this is the Doctrine of the Papists as Bellar. Bellar. Lib. pr. de justifica c. 17 setteth himself to prove in his 17. Chap. Libr. pr. de justificatione Now we utterly disclaime faith to be a condition in either of these senses we say that Christ died only sufficienter for the Reprobate but efficiently for the Elect Christ did not die indefinitely and indis criminatim alike for all but he died effectually for Peter and not for Judas and whereas we make faith the condition of the Covenant without which the benefits of the death of Christ is not applied to us we mean not in an Arminian much lesse in a Popish sense that faith is an uncertain condition left to the power or freedome of our will but we constantly affirme that God hath infallibly ordained such unto faith as shall be saved Acts 13.48 John 6.37 Master Eyre p. 144. sect 9. and Christ hath merited this grace of Faith for us which Mr. Eyre is pleased without all charity to affirme that his adversaries cannot mean faith a condition in this sense as that which God will bestow and is the fruit of Christs death And he saith Mr. Woodbridge denies it to be a fruit of the Covenant and well he might as it is a Covenant made with us for it is an absolute promise made by God as a fruit of his Election and Christs redemption that he will work this faith whereby we shall be brought into Covenant with him for when God promiseth to write his Laws in their mindes in so promising he promiseth faith Jer. 31.38 Heb. 8.10 and then addeth And I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people And we affirme as Christ hath merited this grace for us so he is become a surety of the Covenant to see all that God requires on our part be performed and hence as a head he will by his Spirit in due time infallibly and efficaciously work this faith and so become a Saviour not only by his merit but by efficiency actually applying the fruit of his death And this he will irresistibly work Eph. 1.18 putting forth the same Almighty power that was put forth in raising himself from the dead so that we do not as Mr. Eyre falsly affirmeth which I believe he was not ignorant of lay the whole weight of our salvation upon an uncertain condition of our own performing we make faith to be Gods gift though it be our act And we make the salvation of the Elect as sure as himself and therefore our doctrine is no way disconsolatory to the soules of any only we do not strengthen the hands of the wicked making them to refuse to returne by promising them life as he doth Ezek. 13.22 23. by telling them of their eternal justification and of their being actually reconciled from the time of Christs death Isa 48.22 for we know of no comfort belonging to the wicked while unregenerate for There is no peace saith my God to the wicked but so are all unregenerate persons Antecedently to their faith And for a further clearing of my minde in this particular I adde that if by uncertain Mr. Eyre mean as oftentimes the word is so taken for that which in its own nature is contingent in respect of the second cause because what is contingent usually among men is uncertain and not in respect of God to whom by his predeterminating will even contingent things come to passe necessarily though they come to passe contingently in respect to us I deny not but in this sense it may be
alwayes thus God pardoneth us that believe since the death of Christ and that not from the time of Christs death but it may be long after upon believing and so our sins were a moral cause of punishment God might impute this to Christ before they are committed by us for a morall cause will admit of the effect to go before it self that is the cause of it and both the Patriarchs to whom Christs righteousnesse was imputed and Christ to whom our sins were imputed were existent and the merit of the one and demerit of the other may be communicated at the will of God moved thereby because there are subjects capable of this imputation but now Christs righteousnesse which is imputed to us cannot be imputed for want of a subject to whom it may be imputed for how can that which is not be made righteous and it is the will of God it should be imputed to none but Believers hence then till faith this benefit is not enjoyed Thus have I vindicated my second argument and for the third which he objecteth against That God made a Covenant with Christ that the Elect should have no benefit by his death till they believe I have defended and confirmed that already sufficiently As for this Argument which he brought for the Negative drawn from Matth. 3.17 This is my well beloved Sonne in whom I am well pleased I hope I have given a satisfactory answer to it already and it is answer enough to deny his Assumption as I then did that this voice This is my well beloved Son in whom I am well pleased was not terminated or spoken to Christ mysticall but to Christ personal yet as a publick person and Mediatour And to make Christ mystical and Christ the Mediatour the same is unheard of Divinity nor doth it speak him any great Gamaliel in Theology that affirmeth it As for the scandall he raiseth upon me that I compared my self to Christ and him to Judas and used him uncivilly in language I deny it and have many to bear witnesse of me to the contrary and for the answer to it I referre the Reader to the Epistle to the Reader And I now shall addresse my self to some short answer to his Book and as by the grace of Christ I have not hitherto my conscience bearing me witnesse in the Holy Ghost written any thing which I knew or suspected as unsound so I trust I shall not erre or handle this subject deceitfully but by manifestation of the truth commend my self to every mans conscience as in the sight of God to whom I commend thee Religious Reader and to the Word of his grace who is able to build thee up and give thee an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Christ CHAP. IV. Shewing four material differences between us and M. Eyre wherein he hath departed from the Orthodox faith concerning the Doctrine of free Justification of a sinner through Faith in Christ reduced unto four several Questions which are in this Chapter clearly stated THE Doctrine of Justification through Faith in Christ is deservedly stiled Doctrina stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae and therefore the differences amongst Christians in this point are not of so small concernment as Curcellaeus judgeth that they ought not to breed a Controversie for it is a fundamental Article of our Christian Religion yea all Religion lives or dies with it nothing concernes the glory of God more the honour of Christ or the comfort of a Christian and such goates as shall soile with their feet these waters Ezek. 34.18 or with the Philistines throw dirt into this well do at once strike at the glory of God the honour of Christ the peace and safety of the world and being commanded to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the Saints let not the world wonder that I who am by Mr. Eyre represented as Heterodox in this point stand up both to defend it and my self against those errours wherewith he hath darkened and obscured this blessed truth and endeavoured to render me and his Brethren that dissent from him as those that have overthrown the freenesse of Gods grace in making Justification the effect of Faith and Faith the condition of the Covenant of Grace The matters in controversie depending between us may be reduced to four Heads or unto four severall Questions 1. Whether Justification be an immanent or a transient act whether it be from eternity or a transient act of God done in time 2. Whether all the Elect for whom Christ died be actually justified and reconciled to God antecedently not onely to their faith but to their birth 3. Whether a Believer be justified by faith instrumentally and when the Scripture saith we are justified by faith whether this is understood only tropically by taking faith for the object Christ or whether it be taken subjectively for the act with connotation to the object 4. Whether faith be the condition of the Covenant of Grace God hath made with us For the first Question Whether Justification be an immanent or transient act whether we be justified from eternity or whether it be a transient act of God done in time Here are three termes to be explicated 1. What Justification is 2. What an immanent act is 3. What is meant by a transient act 1. Then by all the Orthodox it is unanimously affirmed that the word justifie or justification is not to be taken in this question sensu Pontificio as the Papists take it that is sensu Physico in a physical sense as if to justifie signified to make just by infusion of an inherent righteousnesse as Bellarmine and his confederates take it for till Etymologies have gotten the supremacy above the Scriptures as the Pope above the Kings of the Earth and so long as the written Word is acknowledged the only Touchstone of divine Truth and that Christs righteousnesse and our works cannot be admitted as corrivals that sense must no way be acknowledged and received in this dispute yet let this be observed against this new Doctrine of Infidels Justification in the state of their unregeneracy though they remain adulterers murtherers parricides yet if Elect say they they are justified even then when they are in the snare of the Devil 2 Tim. 2.26 Eph. 2.2 led captive by him at his will and pleasure Though they walk according to the course of the world the Spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience for Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth he is well pleased with the unregenerate though not with their unregeneracy That GOD when he justifieth a man through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed doth at the same time begin to justifie him physically he doth infuse an habituall and an inherent righteousnesse of Sanctification for God justifieth none whom he doth not sanctifie at the same time Secondly Justification may be taken sensu forensi in a juridical or judiciary sense as in Rom. 8 33. Who shall lay any thing to the
that Justification is a transient not an immanent action For though I deny not that God did from eternity with an absolute fixed and immutable will purpose in time to justifie his people through faith in Christ which faith he will also give and Christ did merit and if this will satisfie Mr. Eyre as he saith it will if he be not a Reuben as unstable as water and fall from his word the controversie is at an end Yet this is not Justification no more then Gods purpose to sanctifie is Sanctification as shall be made to appear in its place Justification leaveth a positive change upon the person justified He is thereby passed from death to life from a state of hatred into a state of love and friendship but an immanent act leaveth no such change nor do I mean with Aquinas and the Papists a physicall change as when the Lord makes a wicked man a holy man an unclean man a chaste man a passionate man a meek man this is a naturall change and is the work of Sanctification but it is a relative and morall change Take a man that is in prison for some capitall offence and also exceeding sick a double change may be wrought upon this man First let his offence be forgiven and he set at liberty he is now a free man acquitted and set at liberty that before was in bond a dead man here is a relative change but he may be as sick still as he was when in prison let the Physician come and heal his distemper here is a cure wrought his health restored this is a natural physical change so it is here upon Justification there is a relative change wrought We that were debtors to the Law and liable to death and condemnation our sin through faith in Christ is pardoned now we are acquitted and set free from condemnation here is a change of our estate but then also by Sanctification the Lord heales our natures Now Justification is a transient act of God in time upon the Believer acquitting him for Christs sake from the guilt of sin and through his righteousnesse imputed he is accepted unto life eternall The second Question is Whether all the Elect for whom Christ died be actually reconciled and justified from the time of Christs death antecedently not only to their faith but their birth also 1. It is not denied upon neither hand that the Elect are the persons and the only persons for whom Christ intentionally and effectually died 2. It is not denied that the death of Christ is the meritorious cause of salvation and that a full satisfaction was made thereby to the justice of God for the sins of the Elect. 3. It is acknowledged that Christ in his death was a common person making satisfaction for the Elect and such as shall believe and by vertue of Christs death they shall infallibly be brought to faith and that God hath thus farre accepted of this satisfaction as that he neither will nor can require any thing more at the hand of the sinner by way of satisfaction nor at the hands of Christ and that in regard of the price paid we are redeemed 4. It will not be denied but that by the death of Christ God may now freely give us the pardon of sins which without the satisfaction of Christ supposing his eternal decree not to pardon us without a satisfaction he could not do 5. We deny not but Christs Resurrection from the dead was a manifest signe that the full price of redemption was paid and that God gave him a publick discharge from the guilt of our sins and that he rose again as a publick person for our justification that we may be said virtually to die and suffer and rise with him and virtually to be justified in his justification But it is denied by us and affirmed by Mr. Eyre that we stand actually justified and reconciled to God from the time of Christs death antecedently to our faith and birth and that it was the will of the Lord to give us a present discharge from the time of Christs death but God hath limited the benefit of this untill faith So that no person in the state of unbelief and unregeneracy is a subject of Justification this we affirme and Mr. Eyre denies who will have all the Elect though Infidels and in their unregenerate estate under the power and dominion of sin to be actually justified The third question is Whether a believer be justified by faith instrumentally and when the Scripture saith we are justified by faith whether this be understood tropically by taking faith for the object Christ excluding the act or whether it be taken properly for the act with connotation of the Object Now here first it is agreed upon all hands by Pretestants and PÃ pists Orthodox and Socinians Antinomians Remonstrants and Contraremonstrants that it is plainly assâ—rted in Scripture that we are justified by faith It cannot be denied because it is syllabically written the only contention is about the sense I would there were more contending for the Grace then for the right understanding of the Word 1. Then to believe signifies an act of the understanding yielding assent unto Divine Testimony but because the will * Ames Med. cap. 3. Num. 2â— consequently is moved by that assent to embrace the good assented unto and offered in the Gospel therfore faith that is truly saving and justifying consisteth in both faculties therefore we reject their opinion that will have it to be onely an act of the understanding yielding a true * Wotton De reconci lib. 1. par 1. c. 13. n. 1. p. 78. assent to Divine Testimony upon the authority of the Revealer though this be necessary to salvation this comprehendeth not the whole nature of justifying faith which is seated in the heart for with the heart man believeth unto salvation Nor 2. Can we rest in their opinion who define it by assurance and say it is an assurance grounded upon Divine Promises that Christ died for us in particular and that our sins are forgiven For this assurance is a consequent of faith and Justfication and an * Proprium objectum fidei justificantis est Christus vel miscricordia Deâ— in Christo non propositio sive Axioma Ames Bell. Ener Tom. 4. Lib. 5. Cap. 2. Sect. 22. Axiome or Proposition is not the object of faith but Christ and it is a relying upon Christ for pardon not a believing that I am already pardoned it is therefore a * Fider est acquiescentia cordis in Deo tanquam in authore vitae vel salutis aeternae ut per illum ab omni malo liberemur omne bonum consequamur Ames Medul c. 3. num 1. fiducial act or recumbency upon God in Christ for pardon 3. It is questioned Ames Medull c 27. de justificat n. 15 16. whether Faith in the point of Justification of a sinner be to be taken tropically or properly Master Eyre will have
it to be taken tropically only and in a figurative sense for the obedience of Jesus Christ and his righteousnesse by excluding faith so that by faith with him is as much as by Christ or by the righteousnesse of Christ To which I answer that we deny not but faith is to be taken metonymicaly when we speak of the matter of our righteousnesse for which we are justified and in this sense we are not justified by faith that is the grace of faith as the matter of our righteousnesse for it is no where said that we are justified for our faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though it be often said we are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by our faith tanquam per organum as an instrument of which by and by And therefore our Divines do acknowledge we are justified by faith objectively taken but to take faith altogether for Christ and to deny it as an instrument of applying Christs righteousnesse was never the meaning of our Divines and it were altogether irrational to imagine as if by faith were meant Christ excluding faith from Justification for as it is an instrumental cause which our Divines unanimously acknowledge it is taken subjectively for the act and grace of faith it self And thus * Ames Med. Theol. cap. 27. sect 14. Ames saith Est autem haec justificatio propter Christum non absolutè consideratum quo sensu Christus est causa ipsius vocationis sed propter Christum fide apprehensum This Justification for Christ is not for Christ absolutely considered in which sense Christ is the cause also of vocation but for Christ apprehended by faith so that Christ alone absolutely considered doth not justifie * Musc Loc. Com v. Artic. in quo justifice mur. So Musculus expressely Quaerendum est hoc loco quo medio justificemur Deóque reconciliemur Est autem duplex medium in hâc causâ unum in quo justificamur alterum per quod justificationis hujus gratiam apprehendâ—mus utrumque necessarium est neutrum enim sine altero justificat We must seek in this place by what meanes we are justified and reconciled to God But here is a double meanes in this cause one in whom we are justified another by which we receive this grace of Justification both are necessary neither justifieth without the other Musc in loc Com. de justifi Artic. in quo justificemur And so * Calvin Inst l. 3. 11. num 7. Calvin calls it the instrumental cause of Justification Sciendum est esse causam instrumentalem duntaxat instrumentum scilicet percipiendae justitiae quâ justificamur We must know therefore it is only an instrumentall cause to wit an instrument of receiving that righteousnesse by which we are justified It were endlesse to reckon up all that give in their suffrage * Willet in Synopsi Art 6. De fide p. 982. for this instrumentality of faith for Justification only I shall adde one Author more Mr. Rutherford in his Apologetical Exercitations because Mr. Eyre alledgeth him in defence of his opinion that he saith * Perkins Reformed Cath. Differ 2. We say otherwise faith justifieth because it is a supernatural instrument c. p. 5 0 vol. 1. Chemnit Bucan Ursin Scheib Met. de causa c. 22. Titu 784. that fides non est organica causa divinae satisfactionis c. which is true and rightly alledged yet he saith to the act of justifying Subordinatur fides tanquam organica causa Ruth Apol. Exeâ— p. 37. and more to this purpose pag. 51 52. And faith is an instrument because it hath the properties of an instrument prima est ut subsit alicui And the first is that it be subservient to the superiour agent by whom it is directed thus it is an instrument wrought by God the pcincipal efficient cause of Justification and is subservient to his act of justifying us and directed by him to this end Secondly That it hath an influx into the effect of the principal agent by a proper causality and that is by receiving Christ offered I see no danger in making it such an instrument for we are not said to justifie our selves because this grace is wrought of God And what if man be causa secunda Epâ—es 2.8 yet is he not therefore a second cause between God and the action for God doth immediately work it and man is purely passive in respect of the habit and although we might answer that the act of receiving is equivalent to a suffering being a renouncing of all our owne righteousnesse and so acknowledge it as a passive instrument only yet for my part I look upon it as a lively active instrument of Justification as * Ball Covenant of Grace pag. 19. Mr. Ball doth which is amongst the number of true causes and that it is not only causa sine qua non a cause without which the thing is not done which indeed is no cause at all for that is only present in the action and doth nothing therein but as the eye is as Mr. Ball observeth an active instrument for sight and the eare for hearing so is faith for justifying If it be demanded whose instrument it is it is the instrument of the soul wrought by the Holy Ghost and is the free gift of God Nor do I fear hereby to be made the Authour of our Justification or to be made injurious to God or Christ seeing faith is wholly Gods work though our act and it hath this place and office of receiving Christ unto Justification by the appointment of God himself Eph. 2 8 and upon this account alone the Apostle acknowledgeth though we be saved by faith yet it is no lesse of free grace because it is the gift of God The fourth and last Question is Whether Faith be the condition of the Covenant of Grace 1. Here we must enquire what is the Covenant of Grace 2. In what sense Faith is the condition of the Covenant First What is the Covenant of Grace The Covenant of Grace is that free gracious Covenant of reconciliation which God of his meer mercy in Jesus Christ made with man fallen into sin and misery wherein he hath promised pardon of sin and eternall happinesse by Christ upon condition that he * Mark 16.15 16. John 3.16 Rom. 10.6 9 10. Gal. 3.11 believe in Christ promising also to give unto all those that are * Acts 13.48 John 6.44 ordained unto life his Holy Spirit to inable them to believe and so He will be their God and they shall be his people The Covenant of grace under the Old and New Testament is for substance one and the same under various dispensations * Gal 3.16 17. The distance between God and man is so great that although the reasonable creature do owe obedience to his Creator yet he could never have God obliged to him to give him fruition of himself and eternal happinesse but by some
Law in whole as the Arminians and in part as the Papists But we take faith for a condition in this sense for an Evangelicall qualification wrought in us by the grace of Christ without which we are not justified nor saved and shall not enjoy the benefits and blessings of the new Covenant as a cause of life not efficiently as works in the old Covenant but instrumentally by applying by Gods order and constitution Christ and his benefits to the Believer And thus the Scripture saith He that believeth shall be saved he that believeth not shall be damned and that the wrath of God abideth on him * There it was and there it shall rest till by faith it be removed works are required as conditions of those that shall be saved but faith is a condition of Justification And because this faith is freely given salvation is no lesse of free grace then if this condition were not required nor is it absurd that the same thing should be freely promised of God and yet required as a duty of us 't is we are bound to believe and repent and yet faith is Gods gift and Christ is exalted as a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance unto his people for remission of sins CHAP. V. Containing a brief description of M. Eyre's opinion shewing wherein he departeth from the Orthodox faith together with a brief Synopsis of the several errors unsound opinions and selfe-contradictions that he hath intangled himselfe in in the defending of his errour of eternall Justification HE is an unfit man to establish another in the truth who himself is l ke a Reed shaken with the winde inconstant to himself Vide Mr. Eyre pag 62. as well as disagreeing from the truth such in this Chapter shall the Reader finde Mr Eyre so farre as relates to his Book I trust in Christ to manifest and therefore let the judicious Reader observe and judge Now for his opinion as farre as I can gather from his Book I conceive it to be this First He saith that Justification in Scripture is taken variously pro volitione Divinâ pro re volità 1. For the will of God not to punish or impute sinne unto his people And 2. For the effect of Gods will to wit his not punishing or his setting of them free from the curse of the Law that is Justification is taken by him actively for Gods eternal will not to punish and passively for the effect of that will as it is terminated upon the Elect or Believer And he saith that he looks upon Dr Twisse 's judgment as most accurate who placeth the very essence and quiddity of Justification in the will of God not to punish Wherein first let the Reader observe his departing from the received judgement of all Orthodox Divines except three or four in making Gods eternal will to be that wherein the Essence of Justification consists it is well known that unanimously they agree that Justification is not an immanent but a transient act done in time And the Scripture no where calleth Gods eternal will Justification and if the essence and quiddity of Justification consist in this it is marvell the Scripture should never call it so and so often as the Scripture speaks of Justification should speak of it in an improper sense passively taken as terminated upon us Besides the will of God not to punish is but terminus diminuens a decree or will not to punish in time Besides this is not the whole of Justification for it is a will not to punish according to the tenor of the Gospel and Covenant of Grace which requireth faith But I shall argue against this in a more proper place Now if we take it thus as Mr. Eyre will have it his opinion is this Justification is an eternall immanent act or will in God not to punish and impute sin unto his people antecedently not only to their birth and faith but to the death of Christ nor is the death of Christ the cause of this Justification though with him Justification thus taken is most accurate and properly taken and so he maketh Christ no cause of the act of Justification for he will acknowledge no other transient act and immanent there is none 1. And this act is not purely * Page 67. negative as the non-imputation of sin to a stone but privative being the non-imputation of a sin realiter futuri inesse which how Scholastically it is spoken being a privative act of a privation in a positive decree of God when neither the subject nor the sin are in being and as if sin were debitum inesse that that ought to be in us for privation is properly understood of these 2. And this non-imputation is actual though the sin not to be imputed be not in actual being a will not to impute it hereafter may be actual but to call that an actuall non-imputation is improperly spoken 3. This act of justifying is compleat in it self for God by his eternal and unchangeable will not imputing sin to his Elect none can impute it c. Here is a compleat Justification then without a satisfaction for which Socinus will give him the right hand of fellowship and many thanks for a gratuity And yet he addeth that this renders not the death of Christ uselesse surely as to this act it is uselesse * And Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth no other act of Justification and if it be the meritorious cause of the effects of this Justification how was that Justification compleat whose effects could not be obtained without the death of the Son of God Where let the Reader observe also that he maketh Christ no more the cause of Justification then of Election for he addeth by way of similitude As the love of God is compleat in it self but yet Christ is the meritorious cause of all the effectt of it Pag. 67. and so Pag. 66. As electing love precede c. so this act of justifying is compleat in it self but yet Christ is the meritorious cause of all the effects of it Moreover he saith That the Lord did not impute sin to his people when he purposed in himself not to deal with them according to their sins when the Father and the Son agreed upon that sure and everlasting Covenant Page 64. that his Elect should not bear the punishment which their sins should deserve Surely the Lord must then by Mr. Eyre impute it to Christ and so Christ was man and a sinner from eternity and crucified from eternity and all this in Gods minde and there Judas and Pilate and those that murdered Christ did exist too and what will not this bring in And * Mr. Eyre p. 8. the ground of this is that he conceives God constituting and ordaining Christ a Head and the Elect his Members they were by this mystically implanted before they were borne even from eternity And Justification thus taken saith he makes no change in God nor
to be compleated by an act of our Faith performed by the power and liberty of our own free-will so that upon this condition to be fulfilled by us without the assistance of grace the fruits of Christs death shall depend for this had been to purchase for us only a salvability not salvation and to make us our own Saviours but Christ died absolutely to purchase salvation as absolutely is opposed to an Arminian sense of a condition already explained but if absolutely be taken to oppose Faith as a condition to apply Christs righteousnesse by the order which God hath appointed in his Gospel which Faith God hath ordained as a means to bring us into possession of Christ and his righteousnesse which faith God hath ordained his Elect unto and Christ hath merited and shall be infallibly given for this end In this sense I deny that Christs death was absolutely a discharge from sin And therefore affirme that an Elect person is not actually reconciled so as to be immediately justified and discharged from the guilt of sin from the time of Christs death antecedently unto faith nor did God accept of the satisfaction of Christ for a present discharge to the sinner but Christ having laid down the price the Father and Sonne did agree upon a way and order when this benefit shall become theirs and that not to be till actual faith according to the tenor of the Gospel which promiseth salvation only to him that doth believe Having thus explained my self I now shall prove it by these following arguments First If Christ did not die absolutely for the Elect that their sins should be pardoned whether they believe or not believe then are they not actually discharged untill Faith But Christ did not die absolutely for the Elect that their sins should be pardoned whether they believe or not believe Therefore c. As for the assumption it is such a sacred truth that none that have a spark of modesty or grace left will deny for if Christ have died absolutely that they shall have pardon though they die in unbelief let them shew this and I will yield the cause for if Christ had died to have the sins of the Elect pardoned whether they have faith or not then an argument drawn from Christs satisfaction and Gods accepting it so would be nervous and strong to prove an immediate reconciliation but this can never be proved for Without faith it is impossibe to * Heb. 11.9 John 3.26 Acts 13.48 please God And He that believeth not the wrath of God abideth on him And As many as were ordained to life believe◠And the Consequence of the Major is proved thus if Christ did not die absolutely to discharge them from sin without faith then he died for them conditionally that they believe and the benefit of his death is limited untill faith Nor will it availe to say that faith is a subsequent condition not antecedent which I disprove by these following Arguments 1. If an unbeliever remaining so cannot be the subject of Justification then Faith is not a subsequent but antecedent condition of Justification But an unbeliever cannot be the subject of Justification Therefore c. The Major will not be denied where Reason dwells the Minor I prove thus because the Scripture no where maketh an unbeliever the subject of Justification 2. Because then Justification is a priviledge common to Believers and unbelievers but the Scripture peculiarly and solely applieth it to them that believe 3. Because no man out of Christ or disunited can be saved by Christ for Christ saveth none but his Members Christ is called the Saviour of his Body Eph. 5.23 and no unbeliever is a member of Christ for as much as the mystical union is made by Faith for which I referre the Reader to my Sermon and the Vindication of it Secondly Justification and Sanctification are inseparably joyned But were not sanctified from the time of Christs death and antecedently to faith Therefore we were not justified It is evident to experience that Sanctification is not in the least moment of time separated from Justification indeed we grant a priority of nature and order but not of time Hence the Apostle maketh all that are in Christ new creatures 2 Cor. 5.17 1 John 1.6 And if any man saith St. John hath fellowship with God or Christ and walketh in darknesse he is a liar and doth not the truth for then a man might be the member of Christ and the limbe of the Devil at the same time if justified he is a member of Christ if unsanctified a childe of the Devil 1 John 3.8 He that committeth sinne is of the Devil nor can it be agreeable to the purity of Christs Nature and Holinesse to have an unsanctified member of his body nor will the purity and holinesse of God the Father bear it that any should be his childe that is not holy nor can he that is a holy God justifie a wicked wretch so remaining Institu Calvin lib. 3. c. 11. whence Calvin in answer to Osiander when he objected Contumeliosum hoc fore Deo naturae ejus contrarium si justificet qui reipsâ impii manent Atqui tenendum est memoriâ quod jam dixi non separari justificandi gratiam à regeneratione licèt res sint distinctae It is contumelious and contrary to Gods nature to justifie those that remaine wicked To which he answereth But we must remember that which I now said the grace of Justification is not separated from Regeneration although they be several things Thirdly If we were justified antecedently to our birth from the time of Christs death Eph. 2.1 2 3. 1 Cor. 6.9 John 3. then we were never borne sinners under the guilt of sin But this is contrary to many plain Scriptures that say we were children of wrath and such as were unrighteous and could not in our unregeneration inherit the Kingdome of God and for further proof I referre the Reader to the ninth Argument against eternall Justification Fourthly If the state and condition of a man be truly altered and changed and that before God upon believing then was he not justified from the time of Christs death But his estate is truly altered in the sight of God upon believing Hence it is said that they are his people which once they were not 1 Pet. 2.10 1 Peter 2.10 Which in times past were not a people but are now the people of God which in times past were not under mercy but have now obtained mercy Hosea 1.10 Hosea 2.23 which words are taken from the Prophet Hosea upon which words Zanchy observeth that a people are called Gods people three wayes 1. According to Predestination thus it 's said God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew 2. In respect of the Covenant under the Law and so the Sons of Abraham were Gods people and they that were excluded from that Covenant were none of his 3.
diminuentes are not termes of diminution where he plainly taketh Gods eternal Justification for terminus diminuens and so it is not Justification properly and we are reconciled meritoriously and so causatively and virtually our sins are remitted but they are not formally temitted in his judgement untill faith and to this act of Justification faith is an organical cause and so a condition in the sense we take it of Justification though not as the Arminians take it and another place most fully expresseth his minde Dicunt nostri fidem non esse conditionem moventem Dei voluntatem tamen salutem nostram esse conditionatam quod est verissimum Nam Deus non vult nobis aliam vitam quà m quae antecedaneam habet fidem tamen nullo modo movetur voluntas à fide nostra Ours do say that faith is not a condition moving the will of God and yet notwithstanding our salvation is conditional which is most true for God willeth us no other life then that which hath faith antecedaneous to it and yet notwithstanding the will of God is not moved with our faith I hope by this time the Reader seeth what cause Mr. Eyre hath to be ashamed thus to abuse the sense of an Author against his own minde declared in significant termes to the contrary but no wonder when he dares misinterpret Scripture if he misrepresent an Author And for a further satisfaction that Mr. Rutherford dissenteth wholly from him I referre the Reader to his Treatise of the Trial and Triumph of Faith pag. 162 163. p. 59 60 61 62. p. 55. And to his Survey to the Spiritual Antichrist and in the second part of his Survey of the Secrets of Antinomianisme pag. 63. where he maketh faith a condition of Justification And expressely he saith It is a new heresie of Antinomians to deny a conditional Gospel it is all one as to belie the Holy Ghost who saith He that believeth shall be saved he that believeth not is condemned already And pag. 107 108 109. pag. 115. Salt-marsh dresseth up a man of straw to come to Christ 1. In all his dealing with God saith he and so before ever he come to Christ or at his first believing he believeth his Sonship that is being a hog or limbe of the Devil he believeth himself to be an heir of heaven c. which his judgement is sufficiently known in both these Books that I wonder Mr. Eyre could with any modesty alledge Mr. Rutherford in defence of his Error His third Author is Reverend Doctor Twisse and in all the Writings of this Learned man this is the only naevus which adhereth to him but certainly he did understand and hold a necessity of personal Justification by faith as far as I can understand by any thing I have seen of his in his examination of a Treatise written by Mr. Cotton pag. 55. Dr. Twisse Exam. Mr. Co◠page 55. he maketh faith the condition of salvation Certainly God will save any upon condition he believes and repents and on the other side neither is there any unwillingnesse in God but a willingnesse rather yea and that a resolute will to damne any man in case he dieth in infidelity and impenitency for we have the clear Word for it Whosoever believeth shall be saved whosoever believeth not shall be damned and in pag. 95. page 95. he saith that Piscator a precise Divine spareth not to professe that fides est causa salutis which he no way contradicteth and in the same place saith that works are causae dispositivae of salvation according to the Apostles phrase who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance with the Saints in light and he saith undoubtedly Col. 1 12. Gods purpose is not to give the Elect life but upon condition of their obedience and repentance page 96. so pag. 96. As for the harmony you speak of between Gods purpose and Covrnant herein is your Error twofold 1. In that you apply this to the world wholly to reprobates whereas it concerneth the Elect as I have shewed as well as the Reprobate the reason whereof is because it respects only the collating of salvation and inflicting of condemnation which have their course upon condition And therefore he maketh another distinct decree in God concerning the giving and denying grace for the performance of the condition of life and this is absolute without all condition And so likewise in his Vindiciae Grat. he hath these words Rursus videamus quae sit praecepti vis Doctor Twiss Vindic. grat sect 25. p. 196. quo jubemur in Christum credere itaque quemadmodum summa praecepti legalis haec est Si vis vitam ingredi serva mandata ità praecepti viz. Evangelici summa est Si vis consequi remissionem peccatorum vitam aeternam omnis tibi fiducia in Christo collocanda est quod nihil aliud significat quà m nullam aliam patere peccatoribus ad salutem viam quà m credendo in Christum Let us again see what is the force of the Precept whereby we are commanded to believe in Christ Therfore as the summe of the legal Precept is this If thou wilt enter into life keep the Commandements So the force of the Evangelical Precept is If thou wilt obtaine remission of sins and life eternal you must place all your trust in Christ which signifieth nothing else but that no way is open to sinners unto salvation but by believing in Christ where you see expressely that he maketh faith to have the same order of antecedency to salvation in the Covenant of Grace that Works had in the first Covenant and that it is a necessary antecedent and condition of salvation not of the manifestation of this only to the conscience I shall adde but one testimony more because he chiefly builds his opinion upon this Reverend Doctors authority who yet differs as much in opinion from him as the East is from the West Christus fateor est caput electorum praedestinatorum sed non formaliter consideratorum Nequeenim praedestinati quà praedestinati sunt membra corporis Christi sed potius futuri sunt membra ejus nam quod est membrum Christi proculdubio existit Neque enim membrum Christi est terminus diminuens existentiam at praedestinati quà praedestinati non existunt nam praedestinatio fuit ab aeterno hodie multi sunt Electi qui proculdubio adhuc non nascuntur Rursus unio illa per quam fimus ejus membra fit per fidem ergo quot quot Christi membra sunt opportet esse fideles at non omnes praedestinati ex quo primùm praedestinati sunt è vestigio fideles evadunt Adhaec cùm non potiùs fiat caput aliquorum quà m illi aliqui siant membra corporis ejus sequitur Christum non ab aeterno caput fuisse cùm non ab aeterno corpus habuerit mysticum aut membra cujus ratione
answer then by denying the consequence For in the first place payment of a debt is refusable when it is not the same in the obligation but now if there were nothing else to say but this this were enough to prove it not the same dum alius solâ—it necessariò aliud solvitur while another payeth the debt another thing is paid But secondly if a surety of our own appointment pay the debt then it may also be available but the surety is provided by God and not by us And thirdly he paid not the same but the value Fourthly besides Christs death was meritorious for the discharge of another not only by the intrinsecal value but by the constitution of God for if God had ordained it it might have been efficaciously sufficient even for the Reprobate Therefore as Scotus * Scotus lib. 3. distin 19. qu. vin p 74. saith well Christi meritum tantum bonum est nobis pro quanto acceptabatur à Deo Therefore if it wholly depend upon the will of God to accept it and how farre he will accept it it is not injustice for God not to give a present discharge for though he did accept it for them yet not for an immediate discharge and why is it any more wrong to Christs death to suspend the application of it untill faith then to deny the efficacy of it to a farre greater number if God had so accepted it Seeing Christs death shall be as effectuall to all intents and purposes and as certainly applied as if presently the benefit were obtained for faith also is merited and shall be given And God did suspend it till faith as that which in his wisdome he saw most convenient Because 1. Faith answers to that which is the ground of our being partakers in Adams sin it unites us to Christ 2. Hereby God doth not justifie an ungodly wretch so remaining which is contrary to the purity and holinesse of his Nature 3. Hereby Christ is not made a Patron of wicked men remaining so under the reigning power of sin 4. Hereby the Doctrine of the Gospel is freed from scandal it is no Doctrine of licentiousnesse 5. Hereby God will have Christ to be acknowledged as a Redeemer the soul to see his need of Christ and to prize his love and he will have him to acknowledge and take him for his Lord that will have benefit by him and therefore untill then it is the will of the Father and the Son that the benefit of this satisfaction shall not be injoyed untill faith And Volenti non fit injuria If the Reader desire further satisfaction let him peruse the Vindication of my Sermon upon this subject CHAP. XI Containing an answer to those Arguments Master Eyre hath brought to prove the antecedency of Justification to faith that we are actually reconciled from the time of Christs death and that faith is not an antecedent condition of Justification FIrst he saith that the Essence and Quiddity of Justification consisteth in the will of God not to punish and that he endeavoureth to prove by two Arguments 1. Because the definition which the Holy Ghost gives of Justification is most properly applied to this act and saith he it is a certain rule Cui convenit definitio convenit definitum that is Justification to which the definition of Justification doth agree Now saith he the definition which the Psalmist and the Apostle gives of Justification is Gods not imputing sin and his imputing of righteousnesse To this I answer by acknowledging the Argument but I deny that the non-imputing of sin and the imputation of righteousnesse is the whole definition of Justification but it is a non-imputing of sin and imputing of righteousnesse according to the tenour of the Gospel by vertue of that signal promise He that believes shall be saved And this is intended by the Psalmist and Apostle if it be a full definition for Justification is a forensical judicial act now according to the tenour of the first Covenant which requireth personal and perfect obedience we cannot be saved Now God hath made a new Covenant with us by Christ revealed in the Gospel wherein he hath promised whosoever believe shall be saved Now when God as a fruit and effect of this Covenant doth not impute sin and impute righteousnesse to a person this is truly Justification but thus God dealeth with none untill actual faith Secondly I answer Gods eternal purpose is not formally a non-imputing of sin but a purpose of not imputing it Therefore till this purpose be brought into act we are not pardoned and justified for although his will be actuall yet his non-imputation is not actual but to be done in time for neither is the sin in actual being which how it can be remitted before it be committed let him shew for it is not actually but potentially a sin And therefore in what sense it is a sin in that sense it is remitted onely and neither is the sinner to be pardoned in actuall being but Justification is a change of the state and condition of the person justified passing him from death to life and that for Christs sake but how can the state of the sinner be changed who is yet unborne and never was yet actually a childe of wrath and Christs death is not the cause of Gods eternal will and purpose and consequently if that be Justification we are justified without the merits of Christ and then Socinian doctrine takes place but the Scripture expressely mentions Christs death as the cause of our Justification for which God justifieth us In whom we have redemption through his blood the forgivenesse of sins and God hath set him forth a propitiation through faith in his blood and for Christs sake God is said to forgive the Ephesians Thirdly Whereas you say the words both in the Old and New Testament whereby imputation is signified which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do both of them signifie an act of the minde and will an immanent act I answer that sometimes when they are related to men they so signifie Gen. 15.6 Gen. 38.15 Numb 18.17 Psal 32.1 Psal 106.31 Rom. 4.6 8. yet that they are so taken when attributed to God I absolutely deny but do alwayes hold forth a transient act and not an immanent act as Gen. 15.6 Gen. 38.15 Numb 18.27 Psal 32.1 Ps 106.31 Rom. 4.6 8. 3 Cor. 5.19 nor can any place be produced relating to God as his act where it is so taken for it will ascribe a fallible judgement unto God to say that he imputeth not sin to a justified person that is to say he judgeth and esteemeth them not to have sinned for Gods judgement is according to truth and therefore such as have sinned he looketh upon them as such as have sinned and he cannot esteem them such as never did sin though he may if he will pardon them deal with them as with such as have not sinned and in this
sense he imputeth it not when he pardoneth Secondly His second Argument is thus That which doth secure men from wrath and whereby they are discharged and acquitted from their sins is Justification By this immanent act of God all the Elect are discharged and acquitted from their sins and secured from wrath and destruction Ergo. To which I answer 1. By distinguishing upon your Major proposition that which doth secure presently actually fully and formally from wrath without any other cause intervening is Justification And then in taking the Proposition thus I deny the Minor that Election doth presently actually fully and formally discharge the sinner from guilt and wrath it is but a purpose in God to do it the sinner is not thereby discharged Hence as soon as he is borne he is a childe of wrath which he could not be if he were justified from eternity and so continueth untill faith and the death of Christ is a necessary cause intervening between this decree and the discharge for which he is discharged and without which supposing the decree he cannot be secured from wrath and Mr. Eyre himself acknowledgeth p. 140. that sin lay as a block in the way that God could not salvâ justitià bestow upon the Elect those good things intended in Election How then did Gods decree secure them from wrath if he mean only eventually it doth secure because they shall not have sin imputed to the condemnation of their persons this is true but to little purpose to prove a present formal discharge such as Justification is Therefore when the Apostle saith Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect The Apostle doth not speak of the Elect antecedenter antecedently to their faith but executivè or consequenter as it is executed and compleated in those that are Elected as Mr. Burgesse * Mr. Burg. of Justif p. 186. hath observed Therefore by the Elect he meaneth the Elect Believers therefore if you resolve it either into a universal negative No Elect person can be justly charged with sin or a universal affirmative all Elect persons are free from the charge of sin if by the Elect you understand the Elect before Faith and Regeneration both Propositions are absolutely false for otherwise Christ could not have been charged with our sin if Election did free us from the charge then was there no necessity of Christs dying and then no person is borne a sinner that is an Elect person nor was ever under condemnation then neither was Adam a sinner under condemnation for I take him to be an Elect person and then no man ever was under condemnation for we receive not guilt from him unlesse he also were guilty and we in him But if you take it for Elect Believers then both Propositions are true and this is agreeable to the scope of the place for he had said a little before Whom he predestinated them he called and whom he called that is unto faith them he justified Mr. Eyre p. 64. As for the Answers which he giveth to the Objections framed by himself I have considered them and derected the weakness of them already There remaineth but one Objection which I have not yet given any Animadversion upon and therefore will do it here Object He saith 't is objâ—cted that hereby by making Justification to be Gods eternal will not to punish Justification and Election are confounded His answer to this is that they are not confounded because Election includes both the end which is the glory of Gods grace and all the means from the beginning to the ending conducing thereunto his will not to punish includes precisely and formally only some part of the meanes To this I answer that according to Mr. Eyre's opinion there is no distinction at all between Election and Justification for if it be the same act of Gods will if the object be the same if the end of God in both be the same if the means conducing to that end be the same then is there no difference at all according to him bur the antecedent is true Therâ—fore That with him it is the same act pag. 61. is evident pag. 62. for he acknowledge no transient act but an immanent eternal act of his will purposing salvation in Christ that the object is the same needeth no proof the end is the same the glory of Gods grace in both and that the means conducing to that end is the same Let him that hath but a sparke of reason judge for if the act be the same the object the same and the end the same in both why the meanes should not be the same no reason can be imagined and let him assigne what means God hath appointed for the execution of the eternal Election and we shall easily shew it that the same thing God hath appointed as a necessary Medium to effect our Justification according to his opinon which hold it to be one and the same eternal act of his will And let the Reader observe that he maketh no cause of our Justification but Gods own eternal good will and pleasure as in the case of Election for Christs death with him is not the cause of the act of Justification but of the effects of it of the thing willed and so Christs death with him is no antecedent meanes to effect the act of Justification but a subsequent meaâ—â—â—o fulfill the purpose of his will and what a good friend he is to the Gospel to debase the merits of Christ let the undestanding Christian judge As for those arguments which he useth to disprove that our faith pag. 52. or faithful actions are that Evangelical righteousnesse by which we are justified maketh nothing against me For if we speak of our Evangelical righteousnesse that is the matter of our righteousnesse or that for which we are justified I acknowledge it is wholly in Christ subjective and it is ours only by imputation and that faith is but the instrument to apply this as for that Reverend * Mr. Baxter Brother and Servant of Christ against whom these are leveled he hath since explained his meaning that he understandeth not faith to be the matter of our righteousnesse or a co-ordinate righteousnesse with Christ but he calleth it our subordinate Evangelical righteousnesse in which he disagreeth from us and I confesse it had been more satisfaction to his Brethren if he had not used that terme And therefore being not concerned in it I passe them by The next File of Arguments that he brings up against our cause we finde in the 9th Chapter which though he will have them give fire yet they do no execution nor will they stand the Field and abide the shock of a solid answer which because they are a company of tame Souldiers we will take them prisoners and see how they will abide to be examined He saith that faith doth not justifie as a condition required on our part to qualifie for Justification Where I
by our own works and to prevent an Objection concerning works for works being excluded from being a cause of salvatition then some might aske What place have they and why are they required the Apostle answers they are of necessary use though not to purchase salvation yet they are the way wherein salvation must be had for God hath ordained before that we should walk in them In the 11th 12th verses The Apostle that he might the better affect their hearts with the greatnesse of Gods mercy and freenesse of his grace to them he puts them in minde of their former estate in Gentilisme as if he should say Do but remember what once you were cast but an eye upon your former estate and compare it with your present and your very change will evidence this truth that ye are saved by grace Now this wretched and deplorable estate he setteth down in seven things Two whereof are set down in the 10th verse the rest in the 11th ver which I have chosen for my Text. 1. First remember that ye were Gentiles in the flesh living according to the flesh so that in that estate they could not please God 2. They were uncircumcised that is they had not the seal of Gods Covenant and so were despised by the Jewes who rejoyce in that Circumcision which is made with hands you not only were uncircumcised in heart but also you wanted the outward signe of it in the flesh which is a seal of Gods Covenant And in the Text here are five evils more that he would have them remember First That at that time ye were without Christ that is as Diodat upon the place observeth ye had neither union nor communion with Christ who is Head of the Church the Foundation and Mediatour of the Covenant and the Spring of all spiritual and everlasting blessings Secondly They were aliens from the common-wealth of Israel and so separate from Christs body which is the Church they had no communion with the Church Thirdly They were strangers from the Covenants of Promise that is as Bains observes they had no propriety in the Covenant or promulgation of the Covenant and as Diodat upon the place having no interest nor portion in the goods promised by the Covenant of Grace which was made with Abraham and so often reiterated and confirmed or as Dickson upon the place having no right to application of the promises or as Piscator upon the place Haec promissio foederis gratiae quâ Deus promittebat remissionem peccatorum propter meritum Christi renovationem cordium per efficactam Christi nihil ad eos pertinebat Fourthly They were without hope in that estate in a hopelesse condition without the thing hoped for nor had they while they so continued any ground of hope for salvation Fifthly they were without God that is without the knowledge or worship of the true God they were conscious of a divine power but were ignorant of true God and without all inward or outward worship of the true God they knew not God much lesse knew him in Christ What a chaffy crude jejune and ridiculous glosse then is that of our new Rabbi Mr. Eyre Vindic just gratui◠p. 73. Mr. Eyre in his Vindiciae justificationis gratuitae who makes the sense meaning of these words to be thus The Elect before faith have no knowledge or comfort of Gods gracious volitions towards them or of Christs undertakings and purchases in their behalfe in which respect they are said to be without Christ and without God in the world As if they were not so really but to their apprehensions they did apprehend themselves to be without Christ and without God and without hope in the world but were not as if he should say They were mistaken their estate was good enough but they wanted faith to give them the knowledge and comfort of it which is to contradict the scope and end of this place which is to shew what a change God had wrought by place as the next words declare I wonder with what fate he can thus grossely corrupt the sense of the Holy Ghost when as the plain scope and meaning of the words is to minde them of their former misery before conversion or actual faith they were a Christlesse-people without all actual communion with Christ the Spirit of Christ had not yet drawn them to Christ nor united them to him nor did he yet dwell in their hearts by faith but in respect of any real actual communion with Christ in respect of Justification or Sanctification they were as if there were no Christ and they were without communion with the Church without the means of grace and salvation in a very sad hopelesse-estate without any interest in God or any true saving knowledge of him My purpose is not to speak to all of these but only to the first of them which I shall take as it is in conjunction with that other expression in the Text that they were without hope Observ The Observation then I shall insist upon is this That a Christlesse-estate is a Hopelesse-estate And where there is no union to Christ that soul is without hope this is the head of all spirituall misery to be without Christ this makes a soule to be without God and without hope in the world Rom. 8.32 let a man have Christ and he shall with Christ have all things but let him be without Christ and then he hath nothing he is under wrath poor wretched miserable blinde and naked In the opening of this Point I will oserve this method 1. I will inquire what it is to be without Christ 2. I will confirme it by Scripture and Reason that a Christless-estate is a Hopelesse-estate 3. I will shew you that before actual faith even the Elect of God are in a Christlesse-estate in this hopelesse-condition and then will apply it First What is it to be without Christ and how could the Ephesians be said to be without Christ when they were Elect persons and redeemed by Christ The Apostle speaketh not here of Gods counsel and purpose for so he intended to give Christ to them and them to Christ yet for all that they were without Christ for this is terminus diminuens and did not put them into a state of actual union to Christ nor doth he look upon the price of redemption paid for them for they were notwithstanding this without Christ but he speakes in regard of actual application So Baines upon the place and thus they were without Christ they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absque Christo seorsum à Christo. Now this may be understood in two respects First They were without the means wherein God offers and exhibits Christ for though God had given Christ for them he had not yet given Christ to them they had not the offers of Christ made to them in the Gospel while they were Ethnicks and strangers to the Common-wealth of Israel thus they
person but if by a full propitiation he understand an immediate discharge of the sinner from condemnation before faith to apply the benefits of Christs death this I deny and will make manifest in its peculiar and proper place Where I shall shew it is no wrong either to Christ or the Elect person that the benefit of Christs death is suspended till faith And in this sense I acknowledge that the Elect had no actual right or interest in Christ if you take it for jus in re and not for jus adrem because his death was intended for their benefit not for the reprobate though they have not actual benefit and possession of the good things purchased untill faith In respect of Gods and Christs intention in his death surely an Elect person hath more right to the benefits of Christs death then the reprobate it being intended effectually for Peter and not for Judas and by vertue of this faith shall be given to apply it to all for whom Christ died and so they have a right to the thing but in respect of any right in the thing it self or actual discharge of the sinner I acknowledge in this respect there is no present difference between the Elect and reprobate this is that which soundeth so harsh in Mr. Eyre's eare which I shall sufficiently cleare when I produce in its due place Scripture-authority and Arguments to confirme it I shall now onely vindicate it from those monstrous absurdities that he unjustly loades it with First he saith Nothing could be spoken more contradictory to plain Scriptures but produceth not one place to confirme it but referres us to such Scriptures as he forceth to speak in defence of his own opinion where we shall examine whether what we affirme or he maintaines be most agreeable to the truth only I shall instance in two Scriptures to relieve this truth The first is in Ephesians 2.1 2 3. where the Apostle telleth the Elect Ephesians whom God had ordained to life and for whom Christ died that they were dead in sins and trespasses Wherein they walked according to the course of this world according to the prince of the power of the aire the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience into which number in the third ver he puts himself and all believers before their conversion and saith that they were children of wrath by nature as well as others where the Apostles scope is to shew the freenesse of Gods grace in saving them by faith in Christ by an argument drawn from the change of their estate he telleth them the time was they were children of wrath as unable to help themselves as the dead to raise themselves to life therefore their deliverance was by grace Where by children of wrath the Apostle must mean an estate and condition opposite to their present estate of salvation and justification into which they are now brought by the grace of God and merit of Christ by faith Else first the Apostles Argument from the change of their estate were invalid Now if they would know when they were children of wrath seeing God loved them as elect from eternity and they were redeemed by Christ He answers that it was when they were dead in sins and trespasses and walked according to the course of this world according to the prince of the power of the aire the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience and then they were children of wrath but thus they did walk and live before faith and regeneration were wrought 2. Such an estate of condemnation is here meant as others are in that are the men of this world children of disobedience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 children of unbelief which notes a refractory contumacious disobedience of unbelief seated in the will which is more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is remissible 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is irremissible being a note of finall imperswasibility 1 Tim. 1.13 Paul was sometime a childe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore when the Apostle saith their condition by nature was such as theirs that are children of disobedience a note of such that shall perish surely they were such as were in an unjustified estate 3. If it be such an estate wherein they were dead in sins and trespasses did walk according to the prince of this world and according to the prince of the power of the aire the spirit that now effectually worketh in the children of disobedience having their conversation in the lusts of the flesh fulfilling the desires of the flesh surely this was inconsistent with salvation and the estate of justification God cannot justifie a man with imputed righteousnesse but at the same time he sanctifieth him by imparted Prov. 17.15 and inherent righteousnesse It is not agreeable to the purity and holinesse of Gods nature to justifie a wicked man for He that justifieth the wicked be that condemneth the just even they both are abomination to the Lord and what God condemnes in others he will not do himself therefore they were not then justified Nor doth the Apostle make a naked comparison between the two estates and conditions derived from the first and second Adam but compares the same persons not barely in relation to these but as being really in both these estates at a different time being under the first before conversion and passing from it upon believing where it is observeable that the Apostle doth not say ye are by nature children of wrath which is all Mr. Eyre will acknowledge as you may see pag. 111. but ye were children of wrath he speaks of a condition they were in and delivered from The second Scripture is in the 1 Cor. 6.9 10 11. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdome of God Be not deceived neither fornicatours nor idolaters nor adulterers nor effeminate nor abusers of themselves with mankinde nor thieves shall inherit the Kingdome of God such were some of you but you are washed but you are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Where you see the Elect Corinthians were while unsanctified such as could not inherit the Kingdome of God and therefore were in the same estate with other persons till they were washed and justified where he maketh an evident opposition between the time past and present they were then such as could not inherit eternal life and therefore were justified for if they were then justified what could hinder their salvation And he saith but you are justified he doth not say but you were justified restraining their justification to the time present upon their faith and sanctification being an evidence of the truth of that faith that makes him put their sanctification before their justification so that you see the Apostle affirmes while they were unsanctified they could not inherit the Kingdome of God that is they had no right to it by justification and were uncapable of it but upon the change
Father to lay it down accompanied with sufficient power to break through the sufferings he undertook and to raise up himself again all this constituted Christ God-man being perfectly righteous a fit person to become a surety and now it was just and righteous that Christ an innocent person should be charged with the sins of the Elect. Secondly I grant that no creature that was only a creature whether Angel or man could or ought to undertake this work 1. No Angel ought because Gods justice required that satisfaction should be given by the same nature that had sinne Bernard de pass Dom. 1. Cap. 46. nor was it meet he should be man only that our redemption and salvation might be attributed to none but him from whom we had our creation for that reason which Bernard alledgeth because our redemption would more oblidge us to love then our creation if therefore we had been redeemed by any other then him by whom we were made we should have loved him more then our Creatour Neither could any pure creature be fitly qualified for this work for whatever the creature can do is already debitum a due debt and therefore it cannot supper-erogate or merit any thing for us Thirdly I grant therefore that Christ was God and Man and that it was needful he should be both 1. He must be God that must satisfie God for God was offended and therefore to make satisfaction God in our nature satisfieth for our sin So that here is God satisfying God that if the sin be infinite in the object the satisfaction is infinite in respect of the subject suffering God in our nature and although his sufferings were not infinite in duration nor was there need they should be because he satisfied for such sins as should be broken off by repentance And his end was in suffering to satisfie therefore his sufferings must have an end yet his sufferings were unmeasurably great and what was wanting in the shortnesse was made up in the sharpnesse of the sufferings and it was impossible Christ should be held under the sorrows of death the duration of the prisoner in the Jayle is no part of the debt but accidentall to it he lies there but till the debt be paid Now Christ paid all so as fully to satisfie the justice of God and hence there was no need of his eternal suffering Besides it was needful he should be God that his obedience might be perfect and meritorious to dignifie his obedience and make it of infinite value that he might merit and support himself under his suffering and raise up himself again and performe the rest of the works of the Mediatourship And it was needful he should be Man for as he was God he could not suffer and that he might as justice requireth satisfie in our nature that our pardon might not be an act of dominion only and forgivenesse but an act of justice and satisfaction Fourthly I willingly grant that Christ did suffer whatsoever appertaines to the substance and essentials of the first death or the death naturall consisting in the separation of soul and body and though the curse doth not require any one particular death yet that the Lord might shew the hainousnesse of sin which deserves the worst death of all and that the love of Christ might be manifested and Gods justice declared God the Father appointed it and Christ undertook it to die the death of the Crosse a shameful and base death appropriated to the worst of malefactors Phil. 2.6 8. to shew the hatefulnesse of sin and the greatnesse of Christs humiliation and love in submitting to it he humbled himself to the death of the Crosse 2. I willingly grant Christs suffered and endured most grievous torments immediately in his soul not by sympathy with the body only but peculiar to his soul all that was due to the sins of the Elect that was consistent with his Godhead and Holiness Catechismus Romanus 4. Art Symb. Aquinas Part. 3 q. 46. art 5 6. the Papists deny not that he suffered inward grief in his soul and Aquinas that he suffered the greatest sorrow that could be but I affirme for quantity Christ might and did in this life endure the paines of hell he did not locally descend into the place of the damned he did indure the same that was due to us for substance and kinde though not in all accidents that belong to it he suffered and felt that heavy wrath of God due to mans sin his soul was so struck with horrour that all faculties for a time left there proper fruction and did concurre to relieve nature in that extremity he lay under the revenging stroakes of Gods justice due to mans sin it put him into a bloody sweat in the forethought of it and made him cry earnestly If it be possible let this cup passe My God my God why hast thou forsaken me God for a time withdrew the solace and comfort he was wont to finde in him that sensible refreshing of the light of Gods countenance which was wont to fill him with satisfactory sweetnesse was for a time withdrawn which is a part of the second death and answers to the pain of losse yet in all his time the union of the Manhood with the Godhead was untouched though there was a withdrawing of the sense and sweetnesse of the favour of God his righteousnesse and graces were no way diminished he was most pure in his passion free from all sin Christ brought none of this upon himself by his own sin but was called to this work and in all this conflâ—ct his faith was unshaken crying out My God even when to his present sense and feeling he was forsaken Fifthly I willingly grant that Christs death and sufferings was a very valuable compensation for the sin of man yea he satisfied Gods justice to the full not by divine acceptation God abated him nothing for the dignity of his person but he fully satisfied for the substance what the justice of God could fully inflict yea in respect of some circumstances he suffered more then was due indeed in respect of the substance of his sufferings neither as * Parker lib. 3. de discon li. 51. p. 97. Mr. Parker hath observed the love of the Father nor the justice of God could permit more to be imposed then what was necessary for him to bear as a surety Quoad substantiam poenae nihil plus perpessus est Christus quà m quod per legem debebatur neque enim vel amor Patris vel etiam justitia permittere potuit plura Filio ut imponerentur quà m quae illi necessariò tanquam sponsori ferenda erant Quoad circumstantias autem patientis personam patiendi causam pâ—ssionis efficaciam plus quà m sufficiens satisfactio Christi à nobis dicitur In respect of circumstances as the person of the sufferer the cause of suffering and efficacy of the passion it was more then the Law
Annotations and they clearly hold forth the effect and fruit of Christs passion where observe a plain promise to Christ or Covenant with him about dying and making his soul an offering for sin When thou shalt make his soul an offering or as the Hebrew if his soul or when his soul shall make it selfe an offering for the second Person Masculine and the third Foeminine are in letters and sound the same so I take it the speach of the Father introduced by the Prophet speaking unto Christ that when his soul shall make it self an offering for sin then he promiseth he shall see his seed that is his issue and posterity that should be borne to him as an effect of this which words do not import that all his issue and posterity should be an immediate effect of it but he should see it he should live and survive to see it after his resurrection he should die no more but live for ever and see the fruit of his death The will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand that is he shall daily see souls brought to salvation as a fruit of his death He shall see of the travel of his soul and be satisfied As a woman when her travel is past is filled with joy to behold the fruit of her wombe so Christ should be satisfied to see a numerous issue of faithful soules begotten to God by his death And what that satisfaction is in particular he tells him it shall be the justification of many for whom he died and then he tells him how they shall be justified He saith it shall be by * Notitiâ sui his knowledge or the knowledge of him not his own knowledge taken subjectively the knowledge that he hath of God Vide English Annot. or of them but his knowledge taken objectively that is the knowledge whereby they know him and this is not a bare knowledge of Christ whereby we are justified for the devils themselves both know and acknowledge him but by knowledge is meant faith the antecedent put for the consequent because the knowledge of him is the ground of trust I shall not need to prove that knowledge is put for faith * John 17.3 John 4.42 And the words that follow are a reason for he shall bear their iniquities though in the Hebrew the word is copulative yet it is often used as a cause And if this be granted it renders a reason why he should justifie them because he did bear their sins where the persons are described whom he should justifie not all promiscuously but Believers whose sins he undertook to discharge for he did bear the sinnes of none but Believers Now let Mr. Eyre tell us why God speaking to Christ of our justification by him should say that Christ should justifie us by his knowledge or by faith in him 1. His death alone antecedently to faith did justifie those whose iniquities he did bear unlesse it were to declare his will that his death should be effectually applied only by faith and that none should have immediate benefit but expect it by faith 2. That that was Gods intention in giving Christ was the intention of Christ in dying But God in giving Christ intended not the benefits of Christs death unto any untill faith Therefore Christ died not to purchase immediate forgivenesse unto any untill faith and by consequence there was a mutual agreement The Major is beyond all contradict on because of the unity of heart and will between Christ and God therefore he intended not his death for any nor in any other way then God intended it The Minor is written as with a Sun-beam in Scripture John 3.14 15 16. John 3.14 15 16. As Moses lifted up the Serpent in the wildernesse Even so must the Son of man be lifted up That whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternall life For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life In which words you have a threefold cause of mans salvation 1. The principal Gods love ver 16. 2. The meritorious Christ death 3. The instrumental our faith Secondly You have a comparison between Christ and his Type in two things 1. That as the Serpent must be lifted up for a meanes of healing or else it could not heal and none would look to it so there was a necessity of Christs being lifted up upon the Crosse God must deliver him up to death and he must be considered as dying or else there is no salvation by him 2. The end that such as did look to it might be healed of the stingings of the fiery Serpent so this was the end of Christ dying that whosoever believe should not perish Now as the Scripture sheweth those stingings were deadly and none were healed but such as looked to the brazen Serpent so are the stingings of sin deadly and none are healed by Christ but such as believe Now as Mr. Woodbridge observes they were not first healed and then did look up to see what healed them but they did first look and then were healed so we have nor first everlasting life given us and then we believe but first we believe and then we have everlasting life Now to this Mr. Eyre answers nothing but denies it was the intent of the Holy Ghost to shew in what order we are justified in the sight of God but in so doing he doth not only senselessely beg the question but doth overthrow that wherein the truth and verity of the type consisted for as the brazen Serpent though endued with a healing vertue yet it healed none till he did look so though Christ as dying be sufficiently able to save yet saveth not any till he look to him by faith and in so doing doth destroy that that was the main end of God in giving Christ and of Christ in dying that upon believing we should be saved And therefore I come to the third thing considerable and that is Gods end in giving Christ and Christs end in dying both these are expressed in the same words the Son was lifted up that whosoever believeth c. and Gods end was that whosoever believeth c. where the verity of the major is confirmed that they had the same end Now the Minor is no lesse evident for if Gods end in giving Christ to die for us and Christs in dying were to limit the benefit only to Believers then it followes by undeniable consequence that untill faith none are actually justified by Christs death otherwise the benefit of Christs death is equally extended to Believers and unbelievers and if he saith faith is only a consequent condition and not antecedent then he must corrupt the Text and alter the sense of the Holy Ghost and say that God gave Christ to give eternall life and Christ was lifted up to purchase eternall life that they for whom he was so given and so died
and are said to be in him that they are called his sheep children before they believe which savours of this notion more then mine making them one person in Christ before they had a being sure then their personality by him is swallowed up in the person of the Son of God if he can finde them being existing and actually justified as one person with him before they have either being or faith He saith that this is called a mystical and spiritual union because it is secret and invisible apprehended by faith and not by sense and reason surely this is not only apprehended by faith but it is made and is a formal effect of faith the Spirit worketh this faith by which we are united to Christ And it hath hitherto been the unanimous Doctrine of all our Divines that this mystical union is made by faith which Mr. Eyre opposeth and will have it to be antecedent to it I will instance in a few Mr. Reynolds in his Sermon upon the Life of Christ pag. 450. saith Consider further the formall effects of faith which is to unite a man unto Christ by meanes of which union Christ and we are one body and being thus united the death and merit of Christ is ours So pag. 478. Consider faith in its inherent properties so it is not more noble then the rest that is then other graces but consider it as an instrument appointed by God for the most noble offices so it is the most superlative and excellent grace The first of these offices saith he is to unite to Christ and give possession of him the Apostle prayes for the Ephesians Eph. 3.17 that Christ may dwell in their hearts by faith And a little after This union to and communion with Christ is on our part the work of faith which is as it were the spiritual joynt and ligament by which Christ and a Christian are coupled John 14.19 In one place saith he We are said to live by Christ Because I live ye shall live also in another by faith How by both by Christ as the Fountain by Faith as the Pipe conveighing water to us from the fountaine by Christ as the Foundation by Faith as the Cement and in answer to an Objection pag. 479. Mr. Reynolds Life of Christ do not other graces joyne a man to Christ as well as Faith Vnion is the proper effect of love therefore we are one as well by loving him as by believing in him To this saith he I answer Love makes a moral union in affections but Faith makes a mysticall union and a little after pag. 480. Between Gods love and ours comes faith to make us one with Christ And then the second Office of Faith he saith is to justifie in the same place So Mr. Shepherd in his Sound Believer pag. 111. Look as disunion is the disjunction or separation of divers things one from another so union is the conjunction or joyning of them together that were before severed Hence that act of the Spirit in uniting us to Christ can be nothing else but the bringing back the soul unto Christ or the conjunction of the soul unto Christ and into Christ by bringing it back to him that before lay like a dry bone separated from him Thus 1 Cor 6. â—7 He that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit with him John 6.35 the Spirit therefore brings us to the Lord Christ and so we are in him Now the coming of the soul to Christ Heb. 3.12 what is it but Faith our union therefore is by Faith not without it for by it we that were once separated from him by sin John 6 37. and especially by unbelief are now come not only unto him as unto the loadstone but which is most near into him and so grow one with him c. I speak not this as if we were united to Christ without the Spirit on his part for the conjunction of things severed must be mutuall if it be firme I only shew that we are not united before faith by the Spirit unto Christ but that we are by faith wrought by the Spirit whereby on our part we are first conjoyned unto him and then on his part he by the person of his Spirit Perkins 1 Vol. Chap. 36 order and causes of damnation pag. 78. is most wonderfully united to us So Mr. Perkins after he had shewed that the whole person of every faithful man is verily conjoyned with the whole person of our Saviour Christ God and man he saith the manner of their union is this A faithful man first of all and immediately c. The bond of this union is this this union is made by the Spirit of God applying Christ unto us and on our parts by faith receiving Christ Jesus offered to us And for this cause it is termed a spirituall union So page 299. in his Exposition of the Creed shewing that the mystical union makes us one with Christ and this is by the Spirit he saith Hence the bond of this conjunction is one and the same Spirit descending from Christ the Head to all his Members creating also in them the instrument of faith whereby they apprehend Christ Perkins 2 Vol. in his Ep st Gal. 3.27 pag. 265. and make him their own So Mr. Perkins in his second Vol. propounds this Question How are all Believers made one with Christ Where he makes them only and never till then subjects of this union Answ By a Donation on Gods part whereby Christ is given unto us and by a receiving on our part and a little after addeth that faith is our hand to receive Christ and this receiving is done by a supernatural act of the minde whereby we believe Christ with his benefits to be ours And to this purpose Amesius in his Medulla Theolo Receptio Christi est quà Christus oblatus homini conjungitur Amesius in Medulla Theo. cap. 26. de voca Num. 17.18 l. 1. p. 118. 2 Cor. 5.17 Gal 3.27 homo Christo Joh 6.56 In me manet ego in eo Hujus conjunctionis respectu nos dicimur esse in Christo induisse Christum inhabitari à Christo Ephes 3.17 c. Num. 26 Receptio activa est elicitus actus fidei quâ vocatus jam totus in Christum recumbit ut suum Servatorem per Christum in Deum The receiving of Christ is that whereby Christ offered is united to man and man to Christ He abideth in me and I in him John 6.56 Joh. 6.56 In respect of this conjunction we are said to be in Christ to put on Christ and Christ to dwell in our hearts this active receiving of Christ is an elicite act of faith whereby he that is called doth now wholly rely on Christ as his Saviour and by Christ on God John 3.15 16. I may spare paines of relating any more testimonies of such a known truth and yet Mr. Eyre will have this
mystical union to be apprehended not made by faith Secondly Mr. Eyre excepteth against it as propounded universally that there is no manner of union between Christ and the Elect before they do believe 1. They are his own words not mine for there is a unity of natures in which they agree and a certain relative respect or union very improperly so called between Christ and his Elect but a mystical union I know none till faith and were there any real union before yet Mr. Eyre might have known that rule Analogum quando per se positum stat pro famosiori Analogato and so it ought to have been taken for this famous union or implantation by faith Thirdly He acknowledgeth that That conjugal union between them which consists in the mutuall consent of parties is not before faith And is not this to yield the cause Eph. 5.23 32. is not this the mystical union spoken of in Scripture and so called in relation to the similitude it beareth to the marriage-union and is there any more mystical unions then one and that made by faith hath the wife any right or property to the body name goods of the man till she be married to her husband So till this conjugal marriage-union between Christ and a Believer he hath no actual right or property to the Body Name Goods and Purchases of Christ Fourthly And yet he addeth There is a true and real union that by means thereof their sins do become Christs and Christs righteousnesse is made theirs Shall we not need any more proof of this but your bare word where is it written there is such a union before faith by whom is it besides your self so called and by what name is that union distinguished from the mystical union by faith But let us hear this proof God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ to be as it were one heap or lumpe one vine one body or spirituall corporation wherein Christ is the Head and they the Members Christ the Root and they the Branches Christ the first fruits and they the residue of the heap in respect of this union it is that they are said to be given unto Christ and Christ to them to be in Christ Ephes 1. That they are called his sheep his seed his children his brethren before they are Believers and by vertue of this union it is that the obedience and satisfaction of Christ descends particularly to them and not the rest of mankinde Oh rare invention Oh mysterious union hidden from all ages but now revealed and discovered by Mr. William Eyre a discovery as far excelling that of Columbus as heaven exceeds earth This is such a mystical union as that it is not only not to be apprehended by sense and reason because against both but not to be comprehended by faith neither because it is no where written but let us weigh the strength of his words which carry this sense Because God from everlasting constituted and ordained Christ to be a Head and Believers to be Members therefore there was such a union from eternity As good consequence as this your Book is in print therefore it is all true But I take this to be a grosse errour that the Elect and Christ were united from eternity For 1. Gods decree ordaining Christ to be a Head is terminus diminuens and doth not signifie that Christ was actually a Head having members united to him but it signifies Gods purpose what he did decree to be done in time and it is the continuall panalogizing of Mr. Eyre and the Antinomians to confound the decree and the execution of the decree God decreed to send Christ into the world was he therefore actually sent No not till the fulnesse of time came Gods decree ordaining Christ to be a Head and they to be Members doth not actually constitute Christ a Head and they his Members 2. That that is not cannot be united for union requires necessarily the pre-existence of the persons or things united But now Believers did not exist much lesse exist as Believers from eternity Christ had not a mystical body from eternâ—ty Therefore he was not a Head from eternity 3. This union to Christ is reciprocal whereby Christ is united to a Believer and a Believer to Christ and requires ligaments and bonds to make this union the Spâ—rit on Christs part Faith on ours But they that exist not are not subjects capable of receiving the Spirit or of Faith without which this union cannot be made 4. The Scripture no where speaks of an eternall union therefore there was no such union and as he telleth us We must pardon him if he believe not our unwritten verities * Aâ—â—d he must pardon us if we believe not his written vanities And therefore when it is said that God chose us in Christ Ephes 1. This is not to be understood as if we were then existing and had a being in Christ but it shewes the way and order how God would save us he ordained to save us in and through Christ and for his sake not that Christs merits were the cause quoad actum eligentis in respect of the act of Election but quoad terminum sive salutem ad quam eligimur but in respect of the end or salvation unto which we are elected or ordained And so Dr. Twisse a man of eminent worth and accurate judgement in his Vindiciae * Interca non dicimus Christum in negotie Electionis babere rationem causae meritoriae respectu actûs eligentis sed duntaxat respectutermini salutis videlicet aut vitae aeternae ad quam eligimur Nam Deum eligere nos in Christo ad vitam aeternam nihil aliud est quâ—m Deum constituisse nos ad obtinendam salutem per Jesum Christum Doctor Twist Vind. l. 2. digress 10. sect 2. pag. 74. c. 1. Perinde est ac si dixisset elegit nos ad salutem c. Ibid. In the mean while we do not say that Christ in the businesse of Election hath the consideration of a meritorious cause in respect of the act of God choosing but only in respect of the terme or end to wit of the salvation or life eternal unto which we are chosen for that God should choose us unto life eternal in Christ is nothing else then that God hath ordained us to obtain salvation by Jesus Christ and as he addeth Perinde est c. Even as if he should have said He hath chosen us to obtain salvation by Christ Hither also appertaineth the next verse wherein is taught that God predestinated us that we should be his sons by Christ Jesus implanted into Christ by faith Hinc enim nos filios Dei fieri profitetur Apostolus Gal. 3.26 Omnes est is filii Dei per fidem in Christo Jesu For from hence the Apostle professeth that we are made the Sons of God Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus and therefore are not
voluntary act of condescension on Gods part which is expressed by way of Covenant there is not therefore a mutual obligation of debt between God and man for that is founded on equality but there is no such equality between God and the creature much lesse between God and the sinner it is therefore a free Covenant that God maketh with man and of his abundant rich grace in Christ The Author of this Covenant is God our merciful Father in Christ-Jesut the impulsive moving cause from within was his own free love the outward moving cause was mans misery and Christs merits Ezek. 16.6 When I passed by thee I saw thee polluted in thy own blood I said unto thee live The fall of man was the occasion of this Covenant God permitted man to fall that he might shew the abundant riches of his mercy in our redemption For mercy might have freed us from misery by preventing our fall but the exceeding abundance of Gods rich mercy is more seen in recovering us out of the misery into which we were fallen And the grace of God was much seen in the time of giving this Covenant at the very fall before judgement was given upon the delinquents that they might not be swallowed up with wrath and before Satan had made too great a waste upon the creation and especially upon man drawn by his temptation into condemnation with himself This Covenant was made with Christ * Vide The Assemb larger Catechisme and in him with all that believe for since God and man were separated by sin there was no Covenant could passe between them * With Christ personal that is considered as a publick person but not with Christ mystically considered but in and through a Mediatour reconciling both parties The first Covenant was a Covenant of friendship the friendship between God and man was broken off by sin this is a Covenant of reconciliation There is no reconciliation to God but by Christ therefore this Covenant was made in Christ and for the sake of Christ with us so that there are three parties contracting 1. God the party offended 2. Man the party offending 3. Christ the Mediator between both The Scripture saith Gal. 3.16 The promise or Covenant was made to Abraham and his seed He saith not And to seeds as of many but as of one And to thy seed which is Christ This Christ was not Christ mystical as Beza Piscator and many expound it as Mr. Rutherford hath well observed but Christ personall The reason which they alledge is because if it be meant of Christ personally considered so it would not agree with the scope of Paul who proveth that life eternal is promised to all Believers 2. It would follow say they that life eternal is given to Christ only But with their leave saith * Ruth Trial and Triumph of Faith Serm. 7. pag 5â— Mr. Rutherford this is not sure for the truth is the promise is not made to Christs person singly considered nor to Christ mystical For 1. The promise is made to Christ in whom the Covenant was confirmed vers 17. 2. In whom the Nations were blessed vers 14.3 In whom we receive the Promise of the Spirit through faith vers 15. Who was made a curse for us ver 13. Now not any of these can agree to Christ mystical Christ mysticall did not confirme the Covenant nor give the Spirit nor was he made a curse but Christ Mediatour is he to whom the promises are made and in him to all his heirs and kindred not simply in his person but as a publick person and Mediatour and upon believing we are truly in him and so Abrahams seed and so heires according to the promise And here it will be good to consider the relations of Christ to this Covenant 1. Heb. 8.6 As he is the middle person between contrary parties he is the Mediator of the Covenant 2. As he dealeth between both parties Mal. 3.1 Heb. 7.22 he is internuncius the Messenger of the Covenant 3. As he undertaketh for the parties at variance he is the surety of the Covenant And Heb. 9.16 17 Isa 55.4 Rev. 1.5 4. As he signeth the Covenant and confirmeth it with his blood he is the Testatour of the Covenant 5. As he saw and heard and testifieth all that the Father hath promised to believers he is the witnesse of the Covenant Now as the Covenant was made with Christ in the behalf of the Elect yet it followeth not they were in Covenant before they believe for God Covenanted with Christ to be their God that shall believe in him hence untill we believe we are not actually in Covenant with God and Christ contracted with the Father not only to die for us but to bring us to faith he is a surety to see the condition of the Covenant performed on our part and therefore we must be brought to faith before God is properly said to be in Covenant with us and faith then is the condition of the Covenant in reference unto us Now in what sense faith is the condition of the Covenant I shall here explaine First Faith is not the condition of the Covenant in a Popish sense as if by the performing this condition of believing we did merit and earn eternal life and salvation were the wages of faith and God ex debito bound to give it Secondly Faith is not an Antecedaneous condition * Dicunt nostri fidem non esse conditionemmo ventem Dei voluntatem tamen salutem nostram esse conditionatam quod est verissimum nam Deus non vult nobis aliam vitam quà m quae antecedanem habet fidem tamen nullo modo movetur Dei voluntas à fide nostrâ Ruth Apol. Exerc. p. 3â—4 moving God to give Christ to redeem us and to propound the Gospel to us as if God did not or could not propound the Covenant of Grace to us nor offer the Covenant to us till we believe the price of redemption was paid without any condition that it should be paid though not without a condition for the application of it Thirdly We do not understand faith a condition in an Arminian sense for such a condition by way of contract and bargaine by a free voluntary act of our own performed by the power of free-will withour the predeterminating and assisting grace of Christ by vertue of which God is oblidged to save us and give us the benefits of the Covenant We take it not in such a juridicall sense as the Jurists do for a condition in a strict proper sense upon which the benefits of the Covenant depend nor do we take it in that manner as the first Covenant did that as our workes personally performed by us in obedience to the whole Law were the condition of the Covenant and the matter of our righteousnesse that so the Tò credere or act of believing performed by us should stand instead of the righteousnesse of the
and by faith which he worketh in the Gospel he implanteth us into Christ hereby we are only united and now being one hence his death and sufferings in the merit of it is imputed to us and hereby are we actually acquitted and justified and delivered from that wrath we were subject to by nature Hence then it is evident that we are children of wrath liable to condemnation at our birth and then were not justified from eternity for if we were justified from eternity then we never were borne sinners under the guilt of sin liable to condemnation for Justification is a removal of this guilt therefore the Scripture saying we are children of wrath by nature denieth this eternall Justification and so the Minor is also made evident 2. I answer therefore to the second part of Mr. Eyre's answer where he saith that the Emphasis of this Scripture lieth in these words by nature where he saith that in reference to their estate in Adam they were children of wrath they could expect nothing but fiery indignation yet this hindereth not but that by grace they might be children of his love c. Where observe That the Apostle doth not speak of their naturall estate what it is as they are descended from Adam but he speaketh of it what it was as that which they were actually delivered from and are now not in the same state they were And that was a state inconsistent with the state of Justification for it implies a contradiction that they should be in both at the same time and that in reference to God 't is true they may be considered joyntly in the minde of a man but no man can actually be in both these estates sure they are two different estates the Apostle is speaking of one in Adam another in Christ by faith and at their birth they were in the first in which they could expect nothing but wrath and God in that estate could not pardon them keeping to his own order of salvation therefore then they were not justified therefore when he saith that this first estate hindered not but that by grace they might be the children of love if he mean only that they might be the object of Gods love of benevolence and as an effect of it be brought out of that estate it is not denied but if he mean that they were not then guilty of and subject to the wrath of God and so were objects of Gods love of complacency and justified and that they had as much freedome and deliverance from hell and actuall right to salvation it is denied and he apparently contradicteth the Holy Ghost who saith they are children of wrath John 3.36 and that while they remain in unbelief the wrath of God abideth on them there it was and will remain till removed by faith and it is not we that suborne the Spirit to serve our turne but he is found to bear false witnesse against the Holy Ghost He addeth that God calleth them his Sons and Children before conversion be it granted yet this is not because they actually are so but certainly shall be made so and to distinguish them for whom Christ died from them that shall perish and to shew that it was not for any thing in them that he first set his love upon them therefore he calleth them so not because they were such antecedently to their conversion but consequently should be made such He addeth likewise that it is not any inherent qualification but the good pleasure of God that makes them his children if he mean it is not any inherent qualification that is the impulsive moving cause inward or outward that moveth God to make and take them for his children it is readily granted but if he deny any inherent qualification to be the means of bringing as into the state of Son-ship that he hath predestinated us unto he contradicteth the Holy Ghost which saith John 1.12 John 1 1â— To as many as received him to them gave he power not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 right and authority priviledge to become the Sons of God nor were we Sonnes from eternity but predestinated to the Adoption of Sons Eph. 1.5 And ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus He further answereth pag. 112 by concession Mr. Eyre pag. 112 113. that the Elect in some sense are under wrath because the Law doth terrifie their consciences but surely the Law doth not only terrifie their conscienceâ— but threateneth death and damnation to their persons and God by the Law so long as they remain unregenerate and not only their consciences as he affirmes but their persons are under wrath and the Law sheweth what their estate is towards God and how God doth account of them till they are delivered from that estate by grace and not only what he is by nature For the Law is the Law of God and what power it hath to threaten and condemne it hath it from God and therefore when that condemneth God condemneth if the person be not already delivered from the damning power of it by Christ through believing so that it is not a meer scare-crow or bug-beare to affright the consciences of the Elect when it cannot reach their persons for it holdeth their persons under condemnation till by faith laying hold upon Christ they are delivered from the sentence of the Law for Paul speaketh of himself and the believing Romans Rom. 7.5 that While they were in the flesh that is in their unregenerate estate wherein they could not please God the motions of sins which were by the Law did work in our Members to bring forth fruit unto death the corruptions of nature took occasion by the Law forbidding sin to commit sin more greedily so to bring forth fruit unto death i. e. death eternal which is the wages of all sin and thus they did but heap up and treasure up wrath for themselves in that estate till they were married to Christ and so delivered from this servitude and bondage of the Law and of their corrupt nature The Apostle in that Chapter speaketh not of being under the Law as a rule of life only but he speaketh of being under the reign and dominion of it unto death so as that a man while under it is dead to Christ and that he and the Elect Romans were thus while they were in the flesh I will here adde a word or two about his threefold distinction of the wrath of God First he saith It signifies the most just and immutable will of God to deal with persons according to the tenor of the Law and to inflict upon them the punishment which their sins deserve Secondly It noteth the threateniâ—gs and comminations of the Law Thirdly It notes the executions of those threatenings In the first and third sense the Elect never were nor shall be under wrath but in the second sense they are under the threatening of the Law
Justification to be effected by it as an inherent grace only it puts the subject into a capacity of being actually justified by the righteousnesse of Christ according to the tenour of the Covenant 2. Faith doth not justifie as a Work but as an instrument to apply Christs righteousnesse 3. Though Faith be a Work it is not ours but Gods and therefore none of our Works justifie 4. Though there be a priority of nature in Faith unto Justification yet there is not any priority of time but the same moment that Faith is wrought we are justified Sixthly That Interpretation of any phrase of Scripture which involveth a contradiction is not to be admitted but to say Faith is a passive condition that doth morally qualifie us for Justification implies a contradiction I subscribe the Major with both hands and should be loth such a pouring showre of contradictions should fall from my pen as have done from yours which were enough to drown the reputation of a man that would be counted one of the more manly sorts of Divines And I deny your Minor it implieth not a contradiction to say Faith is a condition of Justification Your proof is this to be both passive and active in reference to the same effect is a flat contradiction Now that is active which is effective which contributes an efficacy whether more or lesse to the production of the effect a condition hath not the least efficacy I answer therefore it is peccant against the Law of opposition for iâ— is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Praedicatum non disponitur cum subjecto secundum eandem subjecti partem naturam For faith is active and pâ—ssive in a different sense if you take faith in genere physico it is actâ—ve if you take it in genere moris it is passive for it is only a condition making us câ—â—â—ble according to the Covenant of Juâ—â—ification not meritoâ—â—ously deserving or by it self effecting Justification but it is not aâ— the same time active and pâ—â—sivâ— in genere phisico nor active and passive at the same time in genere moris and therefore here is no contradiction Besides faith as it is an act it is active and some way helpeth the agent not that God needeth it but because he will not justifie us without it but in regard that this is a receiving it is equivalent to suffering and is a going out of our selves renouncing our own righteousnesse and so is rightly judged passive though formally it be an action yet virtually it is but a passive reception In the next place we shall consider his Arguments which he bringeth in the 14th Chapter to prove that there was no Covenant between the Father and the Son to suspend the effects of his death untill faith and that it was the will of God that his death should be available to the immediate and actual reconciliation and Justification of all the Elect antecedent to Faith Now because these Arguments are his Triarii his Souldiers in the rereward in which he puts most confidence if we can but rout these the day will be our own His first Argument runs thus There is no such Covenant doth appear Ergo there is none A negative Argument I acknowledge in matters of great consequence is availeable Therefore I deny his Assumption and all those Scriptures which promise Justification upon believing and that limit the benefit of Christs death unâ—ill faith is proof enough to prove there was a Covenant between the Father and Christ to suspend the benefits of Christs death untill faith but because he will see the place we referre him to Isa 53.10 When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin he shall see his seed he shall prolong his dayes and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand He shall see the travel of his soul and be satisfied by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justifie many for he shall bear their iniquities Mr. Eyre acknowledgeth this place holds forth the Covenant between God and Christ about the effects of his death if you take the words as a prediction of the Prophet they hold forth a promise of God to Christ of the fruit of his death when God should make his soul an offering for sin or when his soul shall make it self an offering for sin for the words will bear it Now this promise is virtually a Covenant and doth not limit the benefits of his death to the present time but first presupposeth this work to be done and then as a fruit of this he shall see his seed not all his seed presently but he shall see it and prolong his dayes the pronoun is wanting and therefore the words have a twofold sense given them some expound them of Christ who after his Resurrection should die no more others of his issue and race of the Saints and say the Authors of our English Annotations the ancient Greek and old Latine go both that way and so take the meaning he shall see his seed that shall prolong its dayes with a supply of the relative and if so this maketh clear against Master Eyre But however take it which way you will there is enough to evince it He shall see of the travel of his soul and be satisfied that is he shall see that as the fruit and effect of his death which shall give him full content he shall be much refreshed and gladded as a woman after hard travel that seeth the fruit of her womb and he shall live to see it And then follow the words which are the words of God delivered as in his person for Christ was not the Prophets servant But by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justifie many that is by the knowledge of him not his knowledge taken subjectively but objectively that is the knowledge whereby they know him where knowledge is put for faith as This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent and so Paul counted all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ his Lord. Now here God describeth how Christ shall justifie many by his knowledge or by faith on him Whence I argue If God in the Covenant made with Christ did mention faith as a means by which he should justifie many that is all his seed that should be the travel of his soul then was there such a Covenant that the fruits and benefits of Christs death should not be enjoyed untill faith for it is added that he shall bear their iniquities not that this should be a present discharge but to signifie that none else but Believers should be pardoned because he shall bear their sins and theirs only but if they be justified before faith then he beareth the sins of unbelievers and so unbelievers and Believers are the subjects of Justification contrary to the Scriptures But God made such a Covenant and made mention of Faith in it as a means whereby he should justifie
scimus hyssopum singulari purgandi excoquendi efficaciâ pollere Itâ Christus Spiritu suo vice aspergilli utitur ad nos sanguine suo abluendos dum seriò poenitentiae nos sensu afficit dum excoquit pravas carnis nostrae cupiditates dum pretioso justitiae suae colore nos tingit and without these ceremonies thus performed the atonement was not available Sixthly if it be the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect without any condition performed by them then it was his will that it should be for all of them But it is the Will of God that it should be available for the immediate reconciliation of some of the Elect viz. infants or else they cannot be reconciled I answer Mr. Eyre is hardly put to it that he must run to the Philistins to sharpen his goad this argument is taken from Suarez who argueth against faith in general upon this ground because Infants are justified without it Now this argument proveth if it proveth any thing at all that we are justified without it and not before it and so believers are not the sole subjects of justification as Mr. Eyre elsewhere affirmeth but the case of Infants is not to be urged in most questions especially when we are speaking of what God requires in those that are adulti of age unto salvation but I deny his minor and affirm that Infants are not united to Christ without saith they are saved by faith as well as we Thus * Zanch. 5. Tom. in Com. in Hoseam p. 28. Zanchy Vt uniamur huic capiti Christo Spiritus propriae fidei per sese omnibus ipsis etiam parvulis pernecessarius est justus enim ex solâ fide suâ vivet non alienâ assensus autem propriae voluntatis omnibus adultis est necessarius c. ac proinde etiam parvuli quodammodo sibi ponunt hoc caput cùm Spiritu fidei interno in hoc caput donantur That we may be united to Christ the spirit of a mans own faith by it self is necessary to all yea to Infants also for the just shal live by his own faith not by another mans but the assent of our own proper will is necessary to all that are of age And a little after he saith and therefore also Infants do in a manner appoint themselves this head when they are given unto this head by the internal Spirit of faith So also learned * Rivet ad vers Babyl Jesui Tom. 297. p. 254. Rivet Agnoscimus Deum in Infantibus supplere quod deest propter aetatis imbecillitatem internâ Spiritûs sui operatione qui fidei semen in ipsis ingenerat vi suâ eis applicat meritum Christi cujus suo tempore in eis sensum est excitaturus We acknowledge that God supplyeth in Infants what is wanting through the weaknesse of their age by the internal work of his Spirit who engendereth a seed of faith and by his power applyeth the merits of Christ to them whereof he will raise up a sense in his time therefore I acknowledge there is at lâ—ast wrought in them semen fidei a seed of faith by which they become members of Christ and that relation which is in their faith to Christâ— merits is the instrument by which they obtain remission of sins and without which they could not be saved nor may this seem strange seeing we grant that in men grown up they are meerly passive in the first work of grace their understandings and wills no wayes concurring antecedently to this work and seeing it is a work wrought in us without us why may not children be capable of this Besides if Adam had stood even Infants before the use of reason had been sanctified and Christ was so from the wombe and John Baptist and Infants received the seale of the righteousnesse of faith and are they capable of the seal of the righteousnesse of faith and not of faith And therefore though they have not the use of knowledge this hinders not a seed and work of faith they have not actual reason yet they have reasonable soules and when it s said that faith cometh by hearing it is to be applied to persons that are of age to whom the ordinary meanes to beget faith is hearing of the Word preached Seventhly if it were the Will of God that Christ should have the whole glory of our reconciliation it was his Will that it should not in the least depend upon our works and conditions because that conditions will share with him in the glory of this effect and our salvation would be partly of works and partly of grace partly from Christ and partly from our selves nay it would be more from our selves then Christ Ans I shall here distinguish upon conditions A condition is either strictly and properly taken for an absolute condition required on our parts performed by our selves without the help of grace no way given and merited by Christ upon which the effect of Christs death should depend as a cause of the effect if not deserving yet at least-wise obliging God to give the effect such a condition would indeed share with Christ and the honour of our salvation would be ascribed partly to our selves and partly to Christ nay we should be more beholding to our selvs then to Christ because notwithstanding all that he hath done we might have been miserable unlesse we had by the liberty of our Will and improvement of our natural abilities performed this condition but we deny and abhor such a condition as derogatory to Christ Secondly a condition may be taken in a lesse proper sense for an Evangelical condition appointed by God to suspend the benefit of Christs death till the condition be performed which condition is not the fruit of free-will but the absolute purchase of Christ and the free gift of God and shall be infallibly given in the Lords due time to all for whom Christ died effectually to apply the benefit of his death unto justification this condition we acknowledge nor is it any wrong to Christ for it is not the matter for which we are justified and it is the fruit of his death and freely wrought by his own Spirit and the death of Christ is not rendered the lesse certain or effectual but as absolutely effectual as if the effects were already enjoyed Eighthly If it were the Wil of God that his people should have strong consolation and that their joy should be full then it was his Will that their reconciliation should not depend upon conditions performed by themselves I answer that the consolation and joy of Gods people is no whit lessened or abated by this condition before explained for their salvation is as firme and sure as if that condition were not required for they are not left to perform the condition by natural strength as for the condition which Calvin opposeth it is a condition of works
in the Papists sense not in ours And when the Apostle saith Rom. 4.16 Our salvation is of grace that it might be sure to all the seed the same Apostle saith in the same verse It is of faith that it might be of grace and yet you are willing to leave out those words because they make against you nor is it lesse sure by faith Acts 16.48 then if it were without it for faith is merited and shall be given As many as were ordained to eternal life believed Phil. 1.29 and To you it is given not only to believe c. Ninthly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should be available while they live in this world then it was the Will of God it should procure for them immediate and actual reconciliation Ans This consequence is denied the argument maketh against a condition in an Arminian sense not in ours for upon the first moment that a man believeth he is justified and all his sins past are actually pardoned his sins to come virtually so that no following sin shall unjustifie him though it may take away his aptitude for heaven yet not his right and though his sin may deserve damnation and without actual repentance and faith he cannot be saved yet grace shall be given to inable him to repent and believe so that though there must be nova remissio yet there is not nova justificatio though a new remission is needful yet not a new justification pardon of sin is a continued act but our justification quoad statum is done simul semel once and for all this you know to be the Orthodox opinion yet you fraudulently conceal it and oppose us as if we held a condition in an Arminian sense and that so often as we fall into sin we fall from justification and so no man could be sure of salvation untill death Tenthly If it were the Will of God that the death of Christ should certainly procure reconciliation then it was his Will it should not depend upon termes and conditions performed by us Answ Still your consequence doth halt down-right for the salvation of the Elect is not uncertain as to the event but as certain as the unchangeable decree of God can make it but this is Crambe bis vel ter recocta fastidium parit Eleventhly If he willed this blessing to his Elect by the death of Christ but conditionally then he willed the reconciliation and justification of the Elect no more then their non-reconciliation Answ If Mr. Eyre be not he may and I am ashamed of this grosse and wilful ignorance I beleeve he knows it as well as he knows there is a God that the Orthodox abhor these positions of the Remonstrants that we acknowledg that God willed the salvation of Peter with another manner of intention then of Judas and that we acknowledge no condition antecedently to their Election but that he hath absolutely predestinated the Elect unto the end and as absolutely to the meanes and that God did not stand indifferent to the event whether they shall be justified saved or no but absolutely decreed them unto life as the end unto justification as the meanes unto faith as a means to bring them unto justification so that though they be not justified nor reconciled actually yet he absolutely willed that they should be reconciled and therefore gave Christ to die for them and will give faith to apply the benefits of his death As for the proof of his consequence if he willed their salvation only in case they believe then he willed their condemnation if they believe not I distinguish upon Gods Will it is either secret or revealed voluntas signi or beneplacity praecepti or propositi if you look to the will of Gods purpose and his good-will and pleasure he absolutely willed their reconciliation so that nothing shall hinder it but he did not will an absolute reconciliation without Faith there was no condition of his will though of the thing willed but if you look to the revealed will of God the will of precept so he declareth it is his will that he that believeth shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned and thus he willeth their damnation if they believe not Twelfthly If God willed unto men the benefits of Christs death upon any condition to be performed by them it will follow that God foresaw in them an ability to performe some good which Christ hath not merited conditional reconciliation necessarily presupposeth free-will Answ Still his arguments are guilty of this common fate to be lame in the consequence and to fall very short of the mark intended It doth not follow that God foresaw any such ability in man nor doth such a condition as we establish enthrone free-will we yield him that God willed this blessing upon a possible condition not possible to nature but possible by grace not because man can performe it for it requireth the same Almighty power that was required to raise Christ from the dead Eph. 1.18 but because God by his Spirit will work and give it And those he calleth his adversaries do mean it in this sense it is a fruit of a promise made to Christ and an effect of his death that Faith shall be given but not a fruit of the Covenant made with us but rather the condition by which we are really received into Covenant Thirteenthly If God did will that our sinnes should be accounted to Christ without any condition on our part then was it his will that they should be discounted without any condition on our part But the Antecedent is true Ergo. I answer 't is pity that a man whom we hope means well that his Arguments should go out like a snuffe of a candle in the socket as these do And I confesse it is a ridiculous argument and inference yet I will give a solution to it I therefore deny his consequence It is readily granted that the imputation of our sinnes to Christ did not depend upon any condition of ours for we had not then a being when this imputation was made nor was it needful either for Christ or us that any condition on our parts should be the ground of this imputation it was a free act of God in mercy taking off the guilt from us and transferring it on Christ and his sole will and pleasure was the cause of it but that therefore it was the will of God that it should without any ondition on our part be discounted to us is a miserable consequence more fit to be laughed at then refuted But to omit nothing that may have the face though not the force of an argument unanswered I deny the consequence and the reason of it and affirm that the charging our sins upon Christ was not our discharge formally considered the imputing out sinnes to Christ was not a formall non-imputing them to us virtually it was it was a foundation laid for the