the Form of that Imputation but of Justification passively taken I add at last upon the Account of Christ's Merits or through Christ or for Christ's sake because this Faith of ours or Evangelick Righteousness hath so many Defects in the best of Christians that if through the Sacrifice of Christ they were not pardoned and through his Merits that imperfect Duty which is done accepted it could not be imputed to us for Righteousness And I do more especially signifie thereby that Christ's Righteousness which cannot be imputed to us as the Formal Cause of our Justification is and must be very carefully brought to our Account and granted to be imputed as the Meritorious Cause of that Acceptation And in making it the Meritorious I have learn'd of Mr. Baxter to allow it to be the Material also which he says is nothing else but to be the Matter of that Merit because I make our Faith the Formal in our Justification After this I distinguish between this pardoning and bearing with the Defects of our Faith Repentance New Obedience which are the Conditions of the Gospel Covenant and so our Gospel Righteousness or that which is imputed for Righteousness and that General or Total Pardon which the Covenant promises and becomes Absolute upon performing the Condition The one of these is that very Grace or Act of Grace itself as goes into that Act of Imputation or Act that imputes our Faith for Righteousness when the other I say still is the Effect or Benefit following Justification Justification being thus defined by God's imputing a Man's Faith to him for Righteousness it may be understood what Mr. Baxter still tell us that Justification is the making us righteous as well as the accounting us righteous and dealing with us as righteous I have been shy hitherto of admitting the first of these because of the Papists but I will now distinguish There is a making a Man just or righteous by Infusion or by Imputation Gods making a Man just by Infusion is Regeneration which the Papists hold and we distinguish from Justification I suppose Mr. Baxter once intended no other Those that will have Justification nothing but Forgiveness do readily grant this that Justification makes one just for when Sin is forgiven so that there is not the Guilt of any Omission or Commission imputed to a Person he is made Righteous by Non-imputation But I am for neither of these Justification is not making a Man righteous by Infusion nor by Non imputation but by Imputation God imputing our Faith to us for Righteousness Per formalem Justificationis causam justi constituimur Our Faith and Evangelick Obedience is imperfect and sinful and we are unrighteous in the Eye of the Law for all that but God in his judging us according to the Law of Grace does allow of that for Christ's sake instead of all which the Law requires to our Justification By this may that Expression of the Apostle that God justifies the Ungodly be rightly understood Not in the Sence or either of the former that take it only in Sensu diviso so that he who before his Justification was ungodly is no longer so after but In sensu composito Our Faith I say or Evangelical Obedience in regard to the Law or in regard to those Works that are required by the Law to our Justification are no Righteousness no Righteousness which in its own Nature would justifie us but God constitutes it such by the Law of the Gospel and according to that Law imputes it to us for Righteousness A Man believes Let us suppose that Sound Faith The Spirit must have been given to work it in him Where the Spirit is given to work inherent Grace in a Person he is Regenerate But this Regeneration is not Justification For suppose a Regenerate Man should live all his Life as righteously as he is able yet if God should deal with him according to the Law of Works he is still ungodly in that regard and he could not be justified and God's dealing with him otherwise according to his Law of Grace and accounting or adjudging him righteous by that Law notwithstanding all his Failings for Christ's sake is this imputing Faith to him for Righteousness which is the Formal Reason of Justification I must take leave to rake this again a little over for I see some need and I must confess Mr. Baxter hath perplexed me often as to this particular In some of his Books he speaks of Justification making us just by Pardon which freeing us from the Guilt of all Sin Omission and Commission does make us he accounts righteous as we can be made In others he seems to understand with Augustine that Justification makes us just by Grace inherent A Man must believe and repent before he is justified He cannot do that without God's Grace God does therefore first make him righteous by this inherent Grace before he accounts him just or deals with him as such Mr. Baxter was induced to this I think by the Judicious Le Blanc who apprehends that there are three or four places for which he quotes some of our chief Protestants that make Justification the same with Sanctification Unto which Texts I should choose rather to give Answer according to others than to consent to this because it comes so near the Papists as to leave us almost no difference from them I will therefore advance here a Distinction to the same purpose as but now which among the many Mr. Baxter hath he yet has not and it is this There is a threefold making a Man just By Conversion or Regeneration and this is Austine's and the Papists Justification By Pardon and this is Mr. Wotton's Justification Or by the Righteousness of God which I made the Subject of these Sheets as something between Protestant and Papist and this is God's imputing our Faith for Righteousness which is my Justification and I will call it mine because I take it to be the Scriptures where it is expresly delivered as cannot be gainsaid The Papists Opinion to make things clear is that the Grace of God infused is the Formal Righteousness that justifies us or makes us just in God's sight according to the Law of Works Justitia Habitualis à Deo infusa satis est ut homo illa indutus possit in Divino judicio sisti vere justus haberi In this Sence the Protestants lay down this contrary Position that a Sinner is justified not by any Formal Righteousness in himself but by the Mercy of God through the Satisfaction of Christ. The Protestants I own here against the Papist according to the Papists Sence Our Faith or Evangelick Righteousness or inherent Grace I must say this over is imperfect and cannot be our Formal Righteousness according to the Law it is no Conformity to the Law of Works and they of Trent thought of no other but our imperfect Faith Repentance New Obedience is a Conformity to that which God hath made the Condition
obey the Gospel For what Reason If not that thereby they might actually partake of these general Benefits which arise from that Reconciliation Christ hath made by his Death Which can suppose no Conditions in us being the immediate Effects of Christ's Propitiation and must be distinguished from what follows Reconciliation on our Parts But as to the Particular Effects belonging to some Persons as distinguished from others the Question arises Whether God out of his infinite Goodness do bestow them on those whom he designs for Happiness without regard to any Act of theirs Or whether by the Gospel be hath limited the Conveyance of them to the Performance of certain Conditions There is no Question but that if nothing but Freeness of Grace be to be look'd at that is much freer which requires no Conditions nor expects any But if they be expected whether out of Gratitude or otherwise they are real Conditions as to the End But we are to look not only to the Freeness of God's Grace which no doubt was the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace but to the Author and to the Terms of it The Author of it is God himself who out of his Infinite Goodness hath sent his Son to be a Propitiation for our Sins and we cannot suppose any Covenant made by him to be repugnant to the Perfections of the Divine Nature Now Holiness and Righteousness are essential Attributes of God and any such Covenant which in the Consequence of it overthrows the Rules of Righteousness and Holiness must be look's on as contrary to the Pure and Holy Nature of God But such a Covenant as consists only in absolute Promises if it can be called a Covenant must supersede any Obligation on Man's Part to any Duty as a Condition of enjoying the Benefit of those Promises and consequently overthrow the Rules of Righteousness Psal 11.7 But the Righteous Lord loveth Righteousness And he that doth Righteousness is Righteous 1 John 3.7 even as he is Righteous How is it then possible to conceive that God should make such a Covenant of Grace with Mankind as should have no regard to the Practise of real Righteousness And this Supposition must lessen our esteem of the Divine Nature and Perfections overthrow the Design of Religion and make God a Respecter of Persons by taking no Notice of their inward Qualities and Dispositions Which are things of such dangerous Consequence that I can hardly believe that any who pretend to love the Lord Jesus Christ in Sincerity should entertain such Principles from whence they do too naturally follow For if any Person should make it his Business to render Christianity suspected as a Design to Promote Libertinism under a Pretence of advancing Free Grace he could not make use of any Hypothesis more effectual than this That God requires no Conditions in order to the Benefit of his Promises But to suppose that God is so Gracious as to forgive the Sins of truly humble and penitent Sinners who resolve by the Grace of God to depart from Iniquity and to live as becomes the Gospel is so far from any Incongruity to the Divine Nature that it tends more to advance our Apprehensions of God's Goodness joyned with his Wisdom and Holiness and so brings Mankind to a due Love of God and a Hatred of Sin As to the Terms of this Covenant I think it not possible for any unprejudiced Person to read the New Testament and not to see that it still supposes Conditions on our parts to make us Partakers of the Benefit of Christ's Sufferings But it is possible for Men to be so fond of a particular Opinion which they have before taken up that they may accommodate all places to that darling Notion I mean as to the absolute freeness of God's Grace Which if it be pursued must everthrow as well the Satisfaction of Christ as the Conditions on our Part. But here lies the great Difficulty How can we be justified without a perfect righteousness And our own Performances at the best make but an imperfect Righteousness and therefore the perfect Righteousness of Christ must be imputed to us And if a perfect Righteousness to be joined for our Justification This is the Force of all the Reasoning I have met with about this Matter to which I shall give a plain and dictinct Answer 1. I am far from disowning the Righteousness of Christ to have been a perfect Righteousness or that it is the only meritorious Cause of our Justification Or to speak plainer I do freely own the Satisfaction of Christ to be the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace by Vertue whereof we are justified 2. That to be justified is to be put into a State of Grace and Favour with God I do not mean that we are justified by Inherent Righteousness i. e. that God justifies when he gives Grace but that upon our sincere performance of the Conditions on our part God receives us into a State of Favour or Grace And so deals with us as with righteous Persons and not meerly declares us to be such For although the Word Justifying be often used as a Forensick Word or a Law Term and so is opposed to Condemning yet that Use is not to be pressed too far because it will inclose us in many Difficulties about the Tribunal the Law the Plea the judicial Act and the several Causes Material and Formal c. all which I think tend more to darken than to clear this Point of Justification which ought to be kept out of School Terms and Logical Niceties as much as possible since St. Paul did not speak according to them in this Matter For so Adoption is Originally a Law Term used likewise by St. Paul and it would be hard straining to bring Adoption to all the Formalities of the Roman Law If we look into the Design of St. Paul we shall find it was to state the true Ground of our Acceptance with God which he shews could not be from any thing Mankind were able of themselves to perform in obedience to the Law because they were under guilt and could never clear themselves from it But God hath set forth his Son to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood Rom. 325 26. to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of Sins c. To declare at this time his Righteousness that he might be Just and the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus So that here we have the Foundation or Meritorious Cause the Propitiation of Christ the Goodness of God in accepting this Propitiation in order to Remission and Justification and the way we come to partake of it by Faith in Christ as it imbraces these Offers and carries along with it those sincere Endeavours obeying the Gospel which God accepts as our Evangelical Righteousness But to be Justified in St. Paul's Sense is to be admitted into the Grace and Favour of God on those Terms and so it doth not lie barely in Remission of Sins
utterly disclaim But when we make it the Formal Cause only of our Passive Justification we do nothing thereby but advance God's Grace and Christ's Merits as having obtained for us not only than God should require of us no other Condition but our Faith or this inchoate Righteousness unto Life but also that he should constitute by his Now Law this Condition performed to be our Righteousness in the room of that perfect one required by the Old So that as Adam if he had perfectly obeyed his Obedience had been his Formal Righteousness in regard to the Law so is this Ours in regard to the Gospel The other Reason then of their denial is the Supposition that both Protestants and Papists have gone upon to wit that the Law is the Rule of that Righteousness which they on both sides contend for as the Formal Reason of their Justification And upon this Account they both of them are out for the Papist on one side speaks up for inherent Grace and his Works done by it so as he would have them Meritorious and Perfect for the Papist pleads for Merit and Perfection but he can never bring them up to answer the Law seeing he must still pray Enter not into Judgment and forgive us our Trespasses and therefore the Protestant denies that our Faith or Works are any Formal Righteousness that can justifie us and I say the same in the Sence they understand one another for our inchoate Obedience cannot be so when the Law is made the Rule of it On the other side the Protestant pleads therefore for Christ's Righteousness which is a Righteousness indeed that answers the Rule they both make so but this Righteousness being without us though it be upon the Account thereof Id propter quod or Cujus merito we are justified the Papist says stiffly it can never be made Formally Ours so as to be Id per quod we are justified and I must say the same for Truth is Truth and Absurdity is Absurd whether on one side or the other The Supposition then the Ground on which they go being a Mistake it must be rectified Let us understand therefore here that there is a double Rule a Rule of Life and a Rule of Judgment there is Norma Officii and Norma Judicii as I have it in my Pacification and although the Law of Works be the Rule of Life or Duty and being the Law of Nature it must abide so for ever yet Jesus Christ having perfectly obeyed it in our stead for the fleeing us from it in regard to its Condition it is relaxed as I shew there through Grace and the Gospel made the Rule of Judgment and consequently of that Righteousness which is the Formal Cause of our Justification Christ's Obedience was perfect according to Law but it is not by the Law that God pronounces the Believer righteous The Law is not of Faith and Righteousness cometh not by the Law If it be by the Gospel then not by the Law God pronounces a Man righteous it is not by the Righteousness of Christ imputed which is a Righteousness according to the Law but by the Evangelick Condition performed which is a Righteousness accordingly accepted through the Merit and Satisfaction of Christ that the Believer is justified Inter Protestantes certum est fidem etiam vivam non esse justitiam illam per quam coram severo Dei Judicio stamus says Le Blanc This is true I have just now acknowledged but I wonder that this very considerate Man should never come to understand that that severe Judgmen of God he speaks of is the Judgment of God according to the Law and that we stand not at that Judgment I acknowledge again that at that Judgment our inchoate inherent Grace is not any Formal Righteousness or the Justitia per quam we can stand there But there is a Paternal Judgment of God according to the Gospel and at this Judgment our Faith is the Righteousness Per quam or Formal Righteousness by which we are justified If here you will conceive of two Bars you must not conceive of them as before so as if after you are justified upon a Personal Righteousness you must come to another to be justified by Christ but you must conceive of the Bar of the Law as erected first There was but two Persons ever brought to that Bar and they were Adam and Christ where the one was condemned and the other justified They were both Publick Persons and as we all were condemned in Adam so are we all freed from that Condemnation by Christ but upon the Terms of the Gospel We are then as it were already passed the Bar of the Law in Christs answering there in our Persons for us and God will never call him to any move Account so that what Charge or Accusation soever may be raised thence they are all Terrors only as those or Children going in the dark when the Charge alone we are concerned in is the Charge of Non-performance of the Gospel Condition I know our Divines are still ready to state the Question between us and the Papists thus What is that when the Conscience is â—said under the Sence of Sin that we can oppose against the Wrath of God and rest upon for our Peace It is our own Righteousness Works or Merits or is it the Satisfaction of Christ But this is partial and wide there is no Man but will answer streight to the Question and say Christ's Satisfaction It is that we all know that did or could appease God's Justice And this we all know too that we are so far from doing this our selves by our Works or Merits that Christ hath done it without our doing any thing at all towards it It was wholly of Free Grace and there can be no doubt or fear upon the Conscience in regard to that This is therefore not the Question but the Satisfaction of Christ and our Redemption by it presupposed and so a General Pardon proceding Justification already obtained which being Conditional the Question only is whether it be not by performing the Condition that we are justified to make that Pardon absolutely Ours or to have Christ's Righteousness or Satisfaction made so as to that Effect which can be ours no otherwise but Quoad fructus out effectus only This indeed is the Question between some of Ours and the Papists the more is the pity but the Question as to the terrified Christian himself can be only whether the Condition be performed If that be so the Danger is all over If you will ask further What we must rest upon and trust to here in this Case I say to the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ upon the Performance Tho' we trust not our Duty we must trust on God in Duty and I have no apprehensive fear about resting in Duty but this least we sit down short of Sincerity It is by the Performance through Christ's Satisfaction the Believer is justified There is yet
Scripture speaks Lingua Filiorum hominum as the Jews say Or as the Schools Secundum nostrum concipiendi modum in many Matters incomprehensible To leave Mr. Wotton's Genus Definitionis therefore to himself without farther concern he hath defined Justification by Remission of Sin in opposition to those that define it by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness and he hath elaborately proved this to be the Sence of the Church of England and Calvin's with many others I do now agree with Mr. Wotton herein in excluding the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness in his Sence intended that is as our Formal Righteousness out of the Definition because there is no such thing as the Imputation thereof In se tho' the Merit of it be imputed to Believers as to the Effects But I do not agree with him in making Remission of Sin to be that he wont let the other be the Form or Formal Reason of our Justification Because I hold with Mr. Bradshaw our Actual Pardon to be the Effect or Benefit of it The Righteousness of God which is not yet throughly understood by Protestant or Papist and I have made the Subject of this Dissertation is indeed that Formal Righteousness we are seeking and I do not think that any Man in his first natural reading Paul's Epistle to the Romans who brought not his Understanding from without to the place did ever apprehend by that Righteousness of God now Revealed when Remission of Sin was a thing never Hid that Pardon only is to be understood I will advise every Judicious Man therefore when any material Point is concerned in a Text to ponder it in the Original several times 'till he come to some Resolution about it in his own Mind because when he hath sucked in the Sence of another his own Judgment is worth nothing Mr. Wotton hath said enough to turn a Man to his Opinion he is so rational a Man but having been myself otherwise inclined as to the Sence of this Righteousness and finding the Scripture calling no Man righteous but upon the Account of doing righteously I cannot comply with Mr. Wotton in his Notion nor with the contrary in such as the hitherto prevailing Dr. Owen in theirs The Ministry of the Gospel is called the Ministration of Righteousness upon the Account of this Righteousness as also the Ministration of the Spirit in regard of the Grace the Spirit brings to perform it which Austine I remember in his Book De Spiritu Littera hath told us It can by no means be called the Ministration Thereof in regard to Remission of Sins There are many the like Arguments I think I could find out against Mr. Wotton's Opinion but that my Discourse is rather to be Demonstrative than Elenctical and therefore I must not omit that place in Daniel where it is prophesied that Christ shall bring in Righteousness that is a Righteousness procured by his Death and Merits and called an Everlasting Righteousness being that by which they that ever were are or shall be so are justified and saved and it is said brought in and at such a time when the Messiah shall be slain as it is said Now Manifested or Revealed by the Gospel which is I said but now the Ministration of it To which purpose it is to be understood and observed farther that Righteousness as well as Reconciliation and the making an End of Sins is one End of our Redemption which I have explained more * That the End of Christ's coming in the World of our Redemption and the Covenant of Grace was that we should be holy and righteous is said ordinarily by Divines according to the Scriptures but the right and plain Understanding or Reason of what they say is not said by them He hath chosen us in Christ that we should be Holy He hath redeemed us from Iniquity that we should be a peculiar People We are his Workmanship created unto Good Works in or through Christ Jesus Well! when God made Man at first and gave him a Law was it not that he should live holy And when Righteousness then was the End of his Creation and the Law thereof how is this said to be the End of his Redemption I answer therefore Righteousness or Holiness as they are one we must know does lie in a Conformity to the Law which God gives us There is nothing less than this the full Performance of a Law given that is Righteousness Upon this Account as soon as Man once fell and broke the Law of his Creation it is impossible he should be righteous any more unless there were a New Law brought in in the Performance whereof he might attain to that again which he had lost Now to this End was it that Christ came and died This was the very main Business I count of his Redemption as to free us from Condemnation by the Old so even the procuring this New Law or another Law with lower Terms which some Men performing they do thereby become righteous and so have Righteousness according to that Law imputed to them for Remission and Life Eternal Here you see what that Righteousness indeed is which Christ is said to bring in and in what Sence he hath brought it in or how such Texts as these before does attribute our Holiness to him It is called an Everlasting Righteousness as the Gospel is called the Everlasting Gospel because it is the Righteousness in opposition to that of the Law or of Works that all Men from the Beginning of the World to the End of it do obtain Everlasting Salvation Mid. Way of Justif p. 43. other-where Daniel 9.24 Titus 2.14 Well! you will say then if the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness be not the Form of our Justification nor Remission of Sins when some Protestants say the one and some the other and some both what then is the Form of it I answer Mr. Wotton hath told us truly in the rest of his Words It is God's imputing to a Man his Faith for Righteousness This is Scripture express and the Righteousness of God I am treating of is otherwhere called the Righteousness of God by Faith and the Righteousness of Faith for that is express Scripture also Justification supposes a Man just Justificationis formam justitia constare certum est God cannot account a Man righteous without a Righteousness The Papists therefore are hot here with Calvin that will have a Man be justified only by Remission of Sins without an inherent Righteousness and the Protestants as hot with the Papists that will have any inherent Grace or Righteousness of ours to be such as answers the Law that it should justifie us for by Righteousness both understand a Conformity to the Law of Works Both therefore are out There is no such inherent Grace as answers the Law nor any Grace from without either Remission of Sins or Christ's Righteousness imputed that is or can be our Formal Righteousness but it is Faith which is Grace and
by his Grace I say to do how little soever if sincerely done if it be but the Grain of Mustard-seed in a hungring and thirsting after Righteousness shall be accepted unto Life that is be that Condition upon the Account of what Christ hath done for us this I say is solid Consolation Thou sayest when I look on my Works my Heart sinks I am not sure I am sincere but in the Righteousness of Christ I am safe I say this is certain if thou art not sincere thou art not safe And when I doubt whether I am or not I can have no Support but in this that I hope I am I trust I am and that it is upon the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ that Faith that Hope does depend For that there is any Condition at all that the Condition is such that what I do shall be accepted as the Condition performed it must be all put upon Christ's Performance and Merit in our behalf and his Merit is sufficient however imperfect be our Duty for its acceptance with God When then upon a Sence of my Deficiency instead of sinking I grow bolder in my reliance on Christ's Merits and God's Mercy I do not presume on myself but I magnifie his Grace and the higher I raise my Faith thereupon provided I live not willingly in any Conscience-wasting Sin the more Glory am I humbly perswaded do I give my gracious Saviour and good God Thou Man hast the Comfort to apply to thy self Christ's Merits if thou hast performed the Condition But I have the Comfort to apply Christ's Merits to the Condition which makes his Yoke easie and his Burden light as to the Performance and my Desires and weakest Endeavours to find Acceptance When I read such Prayers of David That God would not enter into Judgment with him that he would not be extream to mark what he had done amiss for then he could not abide it and that yet he will have God to search him and try his Reins and Heart and the like I cannot but be convinced that in the Acceptance of such an imperfect Righteousness as he accounted his was through God's meer gracious Condescension Mercy and Forgiveness to him he placed his Justification in which Sence also he calls him the God of his Righteousness When as for any Acceptance of him through the Righteousness of the Messiah to come a Righteousness without him made his by Faith which could abide God's district Justice I find not the Footstep of one such Thought To rely therefore I will say on Christ's Righteousness as ours without regard to any thing within or without regard to the Condition is Self-deceiving But to rely on God's Mercy and on Christ's Merits for Acceptance of what we do and Pardon for the Failings is substantial Religion and of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood a good Exposition I will fetch here one Leaf out of my late Book Pacification and put it into the Margin for the Use and Comfort of this Explication I return to Mr. Wotton who indeed does sweat with stir to prove that Remission of Sin is Righteousness for wiping off that blame the Papists lay on his Opinion that a Man is justified without a Righteousness if it be by Pardon only But this I stick upon that though pardon in some Sence is or may be called Righteousness yet is it not this Righteousness it is not the Righteousness of God I am concerned about that the Apostle means and which is by Mr. Wotton's own acknowledgment that which justifies the Believer It did I must needs say at first and still does move me that I find not one Scripture from Genesis to the Revelation that denominates any one to be a just or righteous Person from Pardon but from his righteous living He that doeth Righteousness is righteous Yet that which does convince me is that by Mr. Wotton's leave it is not Remission of Sin in opposition to Works but this Righteousness of God in opposition to Works and that is our Evangelical Righteousness which the Apostle means while he contends that it is by Faith and not Works that we are justified or that is Faith and not Works is our Formal Righteousness in Justification See a peculiar Argument I offer in my Mid. Way of Just p. 48. I am I say convinced that the Notion the Apostle had of Justification could not be Pardon because in his Dispute whether it be by Faith or Works we are justified he does suppose that if a Man had Works they would justifie him and make the Reward of Debt but that Abraham and none had or have them And consequently while he supposes that if a Man could keep the Law as if Adam in Innoceny had kept it he should be justified it is plain he cannot understand Pardon by Justification seeing where such Works are that is perfect Works which he certainly means there were no Sin to Pardon This Argument may be more pungently framed than it is here or there but the Medium of Probation arose to me in my Mind as perfect Conviction I will now define Justification Justification is an Act of Free Grace whereby God imputes to every Sound Believer his Faith for Righteousness upon the Account of Christ's Satisfaction and Merits giving him Pardon and Life as the Benefits of it I need say nothing of the Genus Definiti an Act of Free Grace it is the Assemblies By a Sound Believer I mean one whose Faith works by Love including Repentance and New Obedience which together makes our Evangelical Righteousness And this Sound Faith is imputed for Righteousness I account in this Sence that God does accept it in the room of a perfect Righteousness not accounting it as perfect but accepting it I say in the room of that Perfection required unto Life by the Law and consequently rewarding it for Christ's Merit sake as much if not more than if it were that I add then giving Pardon and Life as the Effects or Benefits distinguished from the Form of Justification A Right to Impunity and Life Christ hath purchased and gives by his Covenant they that are justified by this Covenant are adjudged to these Benefits so that Pardon and Salvation flow to us I say as the Benefits and are not the Form of Justification One of them is never accounted to be the Form and by the same Reason neither may be the other The Gospel-Law or Covenant does both make and declare all Believers righteous as having a Right to the Benefits of it by Performance of the Condition But as for this or that particular Person that is a Believer or Performer it is God must be Judge This Judgment is to be supposed preceding and the Benefits to be actually conferred by it When I say this Righteousness or Faith is the Form I understand it in that Sence as these Divines do who say Christ's Righteousness is the Form or Remission is the Form the Word therefore is not to be scrupled not
this Comfort here tho' none else in the World for this alone is worth a World that we may must ought to trust lean cast our selves upon the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ for pardoning all our Failings and accepting our poor Mite and if the Soul remains in doubt it must quiet itself upon him If with the Pharisee I justifie myself God may condemn me If I condemn myself with the Publican he may acquit me And what must I do in this Case Behold O Lord I am at thy Bar and I commit my Cause unto my Judge Thy Bar is a Bar or Throne of Grace I cast myself on thy Grace And the Lord send me a good Deliverance at the Great Day As for Actual Pardon and Life that follows Justification the Merit is to be attributed to that which procured Justification on that Condition There is nothing of Merit but Christ's throughout It is Christ's Satisfaction runs through all I must still say as the Meritorious Cause when Performance of the Condition becomes thereby the Formal Cause of our Justification I know how hardly this is like to be received by many when Dr. Owen will allow nothing of any Personal Righteousness or any Works Legal or Evangelical but excludes them all from our Justification supposing that if it be of Works any way it is not of Grace at all when it is therefore of Faith or upon the Evangelick Condition that it may be of Grace Dr. Owen is a Person whose Name I honour for his Worth Learning Comprehensive Parts and one in whom was more of a Gentleman as to his Deportment than in any Divine I knew ever among us Yet is he more Authorative sometimes in his Book than he needs which being liable to hurt the humbly Inquisitive I will speak the more positively in this matter that the Doctor is out as I believe and never came to the plain true knowledge of what Paul means by the Works he opposes to Faith in this Point of Justification Which Works are such as would justifie a Man in the Apostles Account if he had them but that no Man is justified by Works because he has them not This I am past doubt is Paul's meaning and in this particular the Learned and Honoured Sir Charles Wolesley before quoted is rather to be attended A Man says Sir Charles that has not a Legal Sinless Perfection is that Paul means by the Ungodly Rom. 4.5 In my first Papers I wrote I had this Sence of the place and I have it before and in my Pacification I say the like of that Text * For solving this Matter Austin and from him the Schools distinguish of Opera Naturae and Opera Gratiae We are not saved by Works or according to Works done in our own Strength but by Works done by Grace But is this the Apostle's meaning No I have shewn in my Book of Just that One Thing of Three wherein Austin was out and hath misled the Schools is this Notion of Grace By Grace he understands still this inherent Grace or Operation of God's Spirit in us when Paul understands it of that without his Favour or Condescension to us Not of Works but of Grace is all one as not of Desert but of Favour only Grace is Mercy without or contrary to Merit Now when the Papist receives the Solution mentioned the Protestants generally will have all Works tho of the Regenerate to be but Rags and Christ's Righteousness alone to save us But they are both out for Paul's meaning it plainer than they think Not by Works of Righteousness we have done The Righteousness which the Jew hath done is living according to the Law of Moses The Righteousness which the Gentile hath done is his living according to the Law of Nature There is neither one or the other that fulfil that Righteousness which answers God's Law so as it should be able to save him and therefore it is of Grace or Mercy that Any are saved Pacif. p. 29. Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us Which Words have put so many to the inventing Distinctions when the right understanding is to make none the meaning being only Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done because we have not done them and it must be of Mercy therefore and in another way we are saved or not at all See the Quotation above The Works then I have said there and here and must still say which Paul means are such as would justifie us such as would make the Reward of Debt if we had them that is perfect Works Such says the Judicious Le Blanc as the Law requires to Justification And as for that the Doctor hath in answer to this that it is a wild Imagination that the perfect Works of the Law will not justifie us but imperfect Works which answer not the Law will do so it does confirm what I judge of the Doctor 's Conceptions that certainly he never understood the Apostle as to this Matter who I say excludes not Works of the Law from Justification as if they would not justifie us if we had them but because none have them to be justified by them It is therefore the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of the Evangelick Condition that he in his Mercy through Christ's Merits hath instituted in the room of Works to justifie the Christian And as for the Doctor 's quoting Socinus saying this to prejudice the Reader against it I must needs say I like this excellent Doctor 's Judgment the meaner and seeing I took the Notion from Scripture and am sure I am no Socinian myself Socinus was a Man of Reason and it is to be lik'd the better for that It is a thing whether so proposed or not more worth the Thoughts of a serious Man how the Doctrine of Justification as formerly it hath been taught and is maintained by the Doctor can be made to lodge with the Doctrine of Sanctification or Regeneration in the same Scripture or be preached together in the same Gospel The Papists are so careful to have these agree that they make them one The Protestants are so careful to keep them asunder that they will not have any Works of ours not Faith itself as a Work or the Fruits of it Repentance and a Good Life to be brought into our Justification least by going to establish our own Righteousness we submit not to the Righteousness of God and perish Let the Works be wrought in us says the Doctor Of Just p. 524. if they be also wrought by us I fear their Introduction into our Justification doth include beasting This he adds is a dangerous Point even like to make us lose all the Benefit we might otherwise expect by the Grace of God I cannot but remember since I was young holy Mr. Shepherd's Book The Sincere Convert and do reflect sometimes on that Terror the Reading that and the like Books hath wrought in