they may come to receive the Benefit thereof for without that necessary Condition it will be impossible to obtain Remission of Sins though it be so generally promulgated thereby To conclude As in my Answer at large so here in short I say Justification may be taken in a two-fold Sense Compleatly and Incompleatly or rather thus compleat Justification hath two parts the first is not imputing past Sins or accounting a true Penitant as Righteous or clear from the Guilt of past Sin as if he had never Sinned through the Remission which God declared and sealed up to all such in the Blood of his Son and thus far Righteousness as imputed goes and is the first part or Justification begun The compleat or last part of compleat Justification is the Cleansing of the Conscience and Regenerating the Mind from the Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin by the effectual working of the Heavenly Power of Christ and bringing into the Heart and establishing his Everlasting Righteousness in the room thereof Some Scriptures considered relating to this Doctrine To the first part belong such Scriptures as these Isa 53. 11. He shall bear their Iniquities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is He shall bear away their Iniquities as did the Scape Goat figuratively under the Law or That God would declare his remitting or passing over the Sin that was past and. that he would be in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them Also Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justified the Vngodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness that is God acquitted upon Repentance and Faith in his Promise such as have lived in a Course of Vngodliness For no present Work how good soever can justifie any Man from the Condemnation which is due for the Guilt of Sin that is past So that justifying the Ungodly in this place is pardoning the Ungodly and being so pardoned upon Faith in the Promise of God is accounted for Righteousness or as if the Person pardoned had never sinned and this appears from the 7th and 8th verses Blessed are they whose Sins are forgiven and whose Iniquities are Covered Again Chap. 5. 6. For when we were yet wit hout Strength Christ in due time dyed for the Vngodly and verse 8. But God commended his Love towards us in that while we were yet Sinners Christ dyed for us That is Christ laid down his Life to reclaim Sinners and to declare the Righteousness of God for the Forgiveness of the Sin that is past to all Ungodly and Sinful Men that turn from the Evil of their Wayes by unfeigned Repentance it was done in and by Christ for all Ungodly Men but not to the Benefit of any without Repentance Not that people should go on in Sin but by so recommending of his Love and sealing such Glad-Tidings with his own Blood to allure and engage them from their present Course of Sin 1 John 4. 19. He first loved us men must not therefore continue in Sin that Grace that is Forgiveness may abound God forbid Rom. 6. 1. The last considerable Place is in the second Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 5. 21. For he hath made him Sin for us who knew no Sin That is He was made a Sacrifice for the remitting or passing over of the Sin that was past for such as repent and believe that they might be made the Righteousness of God or rather accounted Righteous in the Sight of God as if they had never committed Sin by not imputing or forgiving the Sin that was past This Sence the two fore-going Verses confirm to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them and hath committed unto them the Word of of Reconciliation Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseeeh you through us We pray you in Christ's Stead that you would be reconciled to God verse 19 20. agreeing with Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a Propitâ—ation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission or passing over of Sins that are past through the Forbearance of God which is neither a rigid Satisfaction for nor a Justification from Sins that are past present and to come as a late shallow VVriter in his Preface to the Hartford self-confuting Pamphlet idlely and falsely called the Quaker converted would have us believe but an acquitting from or remitting of past Sin upon Faith and Amendment of Life which makes up that only imputative Righteousness that the Scripture holds forth or we can allow of The Scriptures that belong to the second Part of this Doctrine which makes up compleat Justification are such as these Keep thee far from a false Matter the Innocent Righteous slay thou not for I will not justifie the wicked Exod. 23. I. Lord who shall ABIDE in thy TABERNACLE who shall DWELL in thy HOLY HILL He that WALKETH UPRIGHTLY and WORKETH RIGHTEOUSNESS and SPEAKETH THE TRUTH IN HIS HEART Psalm 15. 1 2. When a Righteous man turns away from his Righteousness for his Iniquity that he has done shall he dye Again when the wicked Man turneth away from his Wickedness and doth that which is Lawful or Right he shall save his Soul Ezek. 18. 26 27. Not every one that sayeth unto me Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that DOTH the Will of my Father which is in Heaven Math. 7. 21. Vnless a Man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God John 3. 3 5. If ye keep my Commandment ye shall abide in my Love John 15. 10. For not the Hearers of the Law are justified but the Doers of the Law shall be justified Rom. 2. 13. If ye live after the Flesh ye shall dye but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the Deeds of the Body ye shall live for as many as are led by the Spirit of God are the Sons of God Rom. 18. 13 14. That the Offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable being sanctified by the Holy Ghost Rom. 14. 16. But this is the Will of God even your Sanctification 1 Thes 43. Because God hath from the Beginning chosen you to Salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and Belief of the Truth 2 Thes 2. 13. Was not Abraham our Father JUSTIFIED by WORKS when he offered Isaac his Son upon the Altar Ye see then how that by Works a Man is justified and not by Faith only Jam. 2. 22 24. In all these weighty Passages there is nothing more clear then that Sanctification both ushers in and compleats Justification First In that no Man can have right to Remission of Sins but upon Vnfeigned Repentance and True Faith begotten in the Heart which is as well the Beginnings of Sanctification as Introduction to Justification 2 dly That though we grant as before at large Remission of Sins not
to Mis-eite Mis-render or Mis-apply our Writings To conclude He seems to write at all Adventures supplying his VVeakness with Confidence and drowning the Noise of his own Forgeries by his vehement Clamours against such imaginary ones as he hath provided for me to go under my Name which is his greatest of all I heartily pray to God that he may be stopt in this Unconscionable Course and come to find true Repentance that Eternal Anguish do not irrecoverably over-take him as the Just Recompence of such Unjust Dealing with us His third Citation was out of I. Penington Can outward Blood cleanse the Conscience Can outward Water wash the Soul clean His Comment upon it is this A plain Denyal of the Efficacy of the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross to cleanse the Soul from the Guilt of Sin by its Satisfaction to the Justice of God To which I answered Doth I. P. deny or any way meddle with the outward Blood concerning the Guilt of Sin past how far it had an Influence into Justification taking Justification in that Sense But doth not I. P. treat of the outward Blood with respect to Purgation and Sanctification of the Soul from the present Nature Acts and Habits of Sin that lodges therein Is there no Difference betwixt being pardon'd Sin past and the Ground of it and being renewed and regenerated in Mind and Spirit and the Ground of that Conversion His Reply to this though he gives not two Lines of what I now repeated out of my Answer lyes thus Reply pag. 74. And if we allow Penn's Construction that he denyed the Blood of Christ which he calls outward to have an influence into Sanctification he commits a foul Error for cleansing the Conscience by Sanctification is the Effect of the Blood of Christ as well as the other The New Testament or Convenant is by Christ said to be the Cup of the New Testament in my Blood wherein all the Promises and Mercies of the New Covenant are asserted of which I think Cleansing by Sanctification is none of the least Rejoynder If by the Promise of Sanctification to be asserted in the Blood of Christ he understands that both the Promise of Sanctification and all other Promises relating to the Dispensation of the Gospel were asserted ratified and sealed to them that believe in and by the Blood of Christ I shall heartily and cheerfully submit But if he mean that the Blood of Christ shed so many Hundred Years ago by the Hands of Ungodly Men is the inherent real Purger of the Conscience from Dead Works I must deny what he sayes for the Scripture attributes Sanctification to the Eternal Spirit It is one Article of the common Creed of the called Christians viz. the Lavour of Regeneration which is by the Spirit But what is all this to J. Faldo's defending himself from abusing I. Penington's Words to wit that by asking Can Outward Blood Cleanse Can Outward Water wash the Soul He would make him to deny Christ's sacrificing of himself upon the Cross to have any Influence towards the Remitting of the Guilt of Sin past which is quite another thing as this Argument manifests which naturally expresseth J. Faldo's wresting of I. P's words He that denyes Outward Blood can cleanse the Conscience denyes that Outward Blood may be a Sacrifice whereby to declare the Remission of the Guilt of Sin past which is so absolutely and obviously false that it may be seen of every mean Capacity Yet hitherto J. Faldo's Reasoning runs Once again before we leave him thus He that is pardoned the Guilt of Sin that is past by the Blood of Christ as a Sacrifice declaring Remission to all that believe is by the same Blood washed cleansed renewed and regenerated in his inward Man from the very Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin which is as untrue as the other yet both these Arguments follow upon J. F ' s mis-rendering of I. Penington ' s words But his Credit in this Particular is not at all blemisht by his Comment upon I. P' s words if we will believe him for he thinks it may be justified by a Passage out of W. Smith Reply Catech. pag. 64. We believe that Christ in us doth offer up himself a Living Sacrifice to God for us by which the Wrath of God is appeased to us This Passage I cited which Penn among many others takes no notice of And if this can be the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem on the Cross of Wood it is a most incredible Mystery Rejoynder There is no Difficulty Friendly Reader in unfolding his pretended Mystery if the Question unto which the Answer was made be considered which was this What is your Faith concerning Christ IN YOU as a Redeemer which relates not to the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross of Wood wherefore to make the Answer deny Remission of Sins to be declared by Christ's sacrificing of his Body upon the Cross which was no part of the Question to be answered is like all the rest of his Injustice towards us If the Answer had rejected that Sacrifice we should have condemned it as much as he hath abused it But unless he denyes that Christ offers himself in his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice W. Smith's words are so far from Denying the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross of Wood that he must allow them to be sound in themselves for Christ is a Mediator and an Attoner in the Consciences of his People at what time they shall fall under any Miscarriage if they unfeignedly Repent according to 1 John 2. 1 2. as allowably as that he prayes in his People as their Head which A. Sadeel saith out of Augustine and D. Everad as anon So that upon the whole this is as strong and clear a Proof as others that he hath hither to brought for as they so this in Question and Answer wholely concerns what Christ is to Man in Man which was no part of the Question and not what he was to any in his Visible Appearance which was the only Question Before I leave this Particular I must again declare That we are led by the Light and Spirit of Christ with Holy Reverence to confess unto the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem as that by which a Propitiation was held forth to the Remission of the Sins that were past through the Forbearance of God unto all that believed And we do embrace it as such and do firmly believe that thereby God declared his great Love unto the World for by it is the Consciousness of Sin declared to be taken away or Remission sealed to all that have known true Repentance and Faith in his Appearance But because of the Condition I mean Faith and Repentance therefore do we exhort all to turn their Minds to the Light and Spirit of Christ within that by seeing their Conditions and being by the same brought both into true Contrition and holy Confidence in God's Mercy
by wicked Works degenerated into the Earthly and thereby rendered our selves Aliens yea Rebels to his pure Law of Life first declares or holds forth Forgiveness of Sins past upon true Repentance by the laying down of his Life and then works out by his Holy Power and Spirit in our Consciences the Sin that is inherent and in the room thereof brings in his own Everlasting Righteousness So that our being accounted Righteous is as Christ was accounted a Sinner That is he was not a Sinner by Commission or Guilt neither were we as of our selves Righteous by Innocency or Non-commission of Sin for then there had been no need of Remission to have been declared by his publick offering up of himself But he was so reputed from bearing away the Sins that were past through the Forbearance of God and we are accounted as Righteous upon Repentance and true Faith because of that Remission and perfect Acquittance of Sins that are past as if we had never committed them Therefore wofully will they be mistaken that shut out the inward Work of God in the Heart and stretch this to Sins past present and to come without any regard thereto when as the Benefit of Christ's Suffering can in no sense be known or enjoyed without the true Faith and unfeigned Repentance which must precede Remission it self by whom or where is that wrought if not by Christ within much more must they go before compleat Justification which comprizeth Sanctification and Redemption we cannot but pron ounce it a Dangerous Doctrine since it flatters People with that being compleated that is not thereby deluding their poor Souls into a Perishing Security CHAP. IX Of the True Christ We own and our Adversary prov'd to deny him THe sixteenth Chapter of his first Book charged us with the Denyal of the Christ of God Among other Testimonies that he brought out of our Friends Books to maintain it I did eflectually consider two viz. This we certainly know and can never call the Bodily Garment Christ but that which appeared and dwelt in the Body Again For that which he took upon him was but a Garment even the Flesh and Blood of our Nature I. Peninington Quest p. 20 23 32. To introduce my Answer I observed at the same time and in the very same page He confost That we don't deny there was such a Man as Jesus the Son of Mary and that God or rather Christ was in him which I then said makes up our Christ I meant God manifested in the Flesh He replyeth thus Reply p. 76 77. But this I told W. P. was no more then the Quakers profess themselves We witness saith Fox the same Christ that ever was now manifested in the Flesh Rejoynder He should have given us the Book and Page where G. F. hath so expressed himself however we deny not that Doctrine for God doth dwell and walk in his Children who are called his Temples and Tabernacles in Holy Scripture 2 Cor. 6. 16. Rev. 21. 3. But we must forever reject J. Faldo's ignorant or worse Consequence That because we own that God dwells in his Children therefore he dwelt no more in that Body of Flesh he prepared to manifest himself by then he doth in his People Or that our asserting that God appeared and dwelt in that Holy Body eminently prepared by him is to be understood in no larger Sense then that in which we understand him to dwell in his Children I might as well argue against the Scripture as J. Faldo doth against us Christ was full of Grace and Truth therefore when he fills his Children with Grace and Truth they have as much Grace and Truth in them as their Lord and Master Or thus God was in Christ and God was in Paul therefore he was as much in Paul as he was in Christ It is after this Rate Reader our Adversary essayes to confute us as if we made no Distinction between the Fulness and the Measure the Treasury and the Gift He was full of Grace and Truth and of his Fulness have we received and Grace for Grace Joh. 1. 14 16. The next Thing I observed from what he gave as our Confession of the true Christ was this That he whom we call Christ is not John Faldo ' s Christ for he was that Body only that dyed here he cuts my Answer of short and bestoweth this Reply upon it Reply pag. 76. Here the Word Only W. P. forgeth he makes my allowing Christ's Body to be his Garment to imply it is not Christ himself Rejoynder Why did he not give my Words who knows by what he quoted of my Answer that he had ever been so kind the Man knew it pincht him and seem'd resolved to conceal it It was this In the midst of his second Proof he inserts these two Words VERY RIGHT as his Assent to that Part of it which to me seems as inconsistent with his Purpose as may be to wit that which Christ took upon htm was our Garment even the Flesh and Blood of our Nature therefore said I John Faldo as well as we acknowledgeth That the Garment is not Christ unless there be no Difference betwixt Christ and his Garment Or that Christ was but the Garment of that divine Being that dwells therein which were unscriptural and very carnal and I still say That Christ's Garment can never constitute him Christ And that as he darkly calls it the intire Christ as I shall make appear so hath he in this Concession contradicted himself and utterly given away the Cause But he is of another Mind as his Reply will inform us Reply pag. 76. The Apostle Paul calls his and the Saints Bodies their Cloathing 1 Cor. 5. yet they were never the less a part of themselves Rejoynder A meer Rattle for Children Did the Body God prepar'd for his Son to do his Will in help to constitute him Christ as much as the Apostles Body did help to constitute him Paul If it did why may we not as well say that Paul was among the Fathers in the Wilderness so many hundred Years before he was born as the same Apostle doth assert Christ by Name to have been the spiritual Rock of which the Fathers drank in the Wilderness 1 Cor. 10. 4. for if the Body constitute him Christ as sayes J. F. then he could no more be Christ before he had that Body then Paul could be Paul before he had his Body and consequently There is no more Absurdity in affirming That Paul was Paul so many hundred Years before he was born then that Christ was Christ so many hundred Years before he was born Again If Paul's Body were but a Cloathing how much more remote doth J. F's Comparison make Christ's Body to be from his Divinity since Paul did not preexist Christ did but he that took that Body and that Body that was taken were not of equal Date for the Body was taken in the Fulness of Time but he that took it and
Why did Christ say I thank Thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth that thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and revealed them unto Babes if they are discoverable by humane Reasoning for Babes are ignorant of that Art yet out of the Mouth of Babes and Sucklings c. The Apostle's Question 1 Cor. 1. 20. was very impertinent if J. Faldo may be of Authority who said Where is the Wise Where is the Scribe Where is the Disputer c. for this implies an Exclusion of all those Arts Sciences and Natural Gifts from any Capacity to reveal the deep Things of God shut up in the Divine Principle of Life Besides W. S's Words imply a Clouded Understanding and degenerated and therefore Uncapable J. F. must either intend by his Derision that he thinks W. S. deserves to be hiss'd for denying the Knowledge of Divine Things to be attainable by the Degenerated Understanding of Man or sanctified If the first All may have Cause to abhor his False Doctrine If the latter I would know which way that can be without the Divine Principle of Life This abundantly manifests J. Faldo's unsavory Spirit and proves him to be ignorant of the Way Method Work of God in his Children When the Natural Man by his Reason can know Christ he may know his Sheep the Scriptures and the Power of God and not before but because it is impossible in Reasoning or Arguing pro and con by the utmost Strength and Search of Natural Abilities to know Christ but by the Revelation of the Spirit of God alone as hath been abundantly proved therefore William Smith's words are sound and weighty and J. Faldo's carnal and prophane showing himself to be a Mocker of the Priviledges and Mysteries of the Gospel but what else may we expect from one that walks after the Lusts of his own vain Mind having not the Spirit Jude 18 19. Yet that we may manifest how inconsistent he is with himself as that he can't write against us but he must write for us take this Passage out of Quakerism No Christianity which ought alwayes to begin his Books against us upon this subject as it ends this Chapter of mine Those Gospel-Illuminations are beyond the utmost reach of our Natural Faculties of the Mind though sanctified and therefore it is said to be 2 Tim. 3. 16. Divinely inspired It is not produced in the Exercise of the Rational Faculties the Soul is purely passive or receptive therein and is to those Illuminations as the Wax is to the Seal CHAP. XV. His several gross Miscarriages summ'd and further observed I. Of his Over-looking my Answer and Arguments OF Twenty Two Chapters in his Reply there is not one of them in which he hath not wilfully declined inserting my Answer and Arguments and only flutters about pecks and scratches at some part that is of least moment to the Reason of the Point perhaps some Rebuke or Reflection upon the ill use he makes of our Friends Writings particularly pag. 9 22 23 24 30 31 35 53 56 57 71 73 82 83 85 86 90 92 93. How is it possible my Arguments should be conquered when they were never encounter'd I was never yet so unjustly dealt withal in this Particular by any Adversary of his Pretences II. Of his drawing False Inferences Where he ventures at any time to insert any considerable part of my Answer he is sure to draw some Inference that may bring an Odium my words never deserved I could particularize at large pag. 6 13 17 18 31 35 41 42 47 49 71 72 73 74 75 85 86 87 88 89 90 91. but take these following for the rest 1. From Edw. Burroughs Reflecting upon Peoples imagining God to be confined to some place beyond the Stars he implies they deny Christ's Manhood Vindic. pag. 6. 2. From our not styling the Scriptures the Word but Words of God he infers that we deny the Scriptures First Book p. 18 19. 3. From our Asserting the Doctrine of Inspiration and Certainty of what we are inspired either to write or speak he infers not only our Equalling with but preferring what we speak and write before the Scriptures First Book pag. 40. Vind. p. 17. 4. From our Condemning the Imitation of any of the Holy Men of God of former Ages in particular Cases without they are thereunto required by the Spirit of the Lord he infers that Commands of God in Scriptures are no Commands unless we think so and that it is no Sin to break all Commands in the Bible if our Consciences can but be so blinded as to tell us it is no Sin Vind. p. 34 35. 5. From our Asserting that there is no knowing of God but by the Spirit and that Mens Apprehensions of God and his Work in the Souls of his People are but the Endeavours and Effects of the Wisdom of the Flesh he infers that we oppose the Spirit and the Scriptures nay that we reject and scorn them Vind. pag. 41 42 47. 6. From our denying a Carnal Worldly Mercenary Ministry Lifeless Prayers a meer formal Church Preaching and not by the Spirit and W. Smith's saying that the present Use of Bread and Wine and Water called Baptism and the Supper as they are used at this Day are no other then Popish and Humane he infers that the Quakers deny the Gospel-Ministry Gospel-Prayer Gospel-Church Gospel-Preaching and that we CALL Baptism and the Lord's Supper as PRACTISED IN THE FIRST AGE AFTER CHRIST the Popes Inventions c. Vind. from p. 49. to p. 71. Oh Injurious 7. From our reproving People for feeding in an Unconverted State upon the meer Report of what Christ hath done without them and depending thereon from our asserting that Justification taken for Remission goes not before Repentance which is an inward Work much less that Men can be compleatly justifi'd or made inwardly just but by the washing of the Word of Regeneration Sanctification of the Eternal Spirit this Man dares to infer Our Denyal yea our Vndervalue and that to the Degree of Blasphemous Contempt of the Transactions of Christ at Jerusalem Vind. p. 71 72 73 74. 8. From J. Penning asking If outward Blood would cleanse the Conscience from indwelling Sin he infers that we deny all Benefit by the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross for the declaring of Remission of Sins Rom. 3. 25. First Book 2. Part p. 46 47. Vind. 77. 9. From our chusing to call that Body God prepared in which to do his Will the Body of Christ rather then the Christ of God And from our asserting God to be that Light which enlightens every Man and that the Soul of Man had something of the Life of God in its primitive Perfection he makes no more ado but concludes First That we deny the Christ of God 2dly That we make the Measure of Light in every Man the Eternal God thereby confining him to Man's Soul And lastly That the Soul of Man is